On Mar 30, 10:50am, cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Subject: Re: Things todo before we announce
> At Thu, 30 Mar 2000 09:54:52 -0500,
> Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > just a small thing, but it could become a headache later - is
> > anyone violently opposed to this change...?
> Not really... but I think a better idea would be
> to have /usr/xfs/ put all of our binaries in there,
> with links in /sbin.
well, mkfs is a bit special - /usr might be a separate filesystem
and might not be mounted at the time mkfs is needed. perhaps the
same is true for the other xfs tools too, i'm not sure.
could implement your approach going the other way though (i.e.
having links from /usr/xfs/* to the real binary in /sbin, but
i'm not sure what that buys us...? do the different distributions
do different things here? what does the lfs say on this?)
i'll go ahead and make the change (/sbin/mkfs_xfs now becomes
/sbin/mkfs.xfs, so that ``mkfs -t xfs'' works).