On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 01:48:15PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > On 29 August 2014 13:44, Jason McIntyre <j...@kerhand.co.uk> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 01:39:57PM +0200, Mike Belopuhov wrote: > >> On 29 August 2014 08:19, Jason McIntyre <j...@kerhand.co.uk> wrote: > >> > > >> > is this correct? i'm not a user myself, but the text states that > >> > "special", for mount_mfs, is "typically that of the primary swap area". > >> > how would you even define the swap area without a disklabel? > >> > > >> > jmc > >> > > >> > >> sort of yes. mount_mfs(8) says this: > >> > >> [...] The special file is only used > >> to read the disk label which provides a set of configuration > >> parameters > >> for the memory based file system. The special file is typically that > >> of > >> the primary swap area, since that is where the file system will be > >> backed > >> up when free memory gets low and the memory supporting the file system > >> has to be paged. If the keyword ``swap'' is used instead of a special > >> file name, default configuration parameters will be used. (This > >> option > >> is useful when trying to use mount_mfs on a machine without any > >> disks.) > >> > >> in reality it fakes up a disklabel and proceeds. number of XXX's > >> around this code is also mildly amusing... > >> > > > > so the diff posted was correct and should be committed? > > jmc > > > > yes, i believe so. OK mikeb >
ok, committed. thanks for the diff, navan. jmc
