On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:19:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> | >
> | > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> | > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
> |
> | That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> | be supported. Once upon a time (IIRC) df used to fall back to opening
> | the block device and examining ffs structures directly; that was
> | removed because it violated desirable abstractions.
>
> Totally agree, please remove this complex and hard to maintain stuff.
Once again: this needs to be supported for transition, up to 6.0 (inclusive).
--
Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--
