trentshea at gmail.com
Wed Mar 17 20:37:54 PDT 2010
On Wednesday 17 March 2010 21:16:30 Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Trent Shea wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 March 2010 20:25:16 Trent Shea wrote:
> >> As dump/restore is not part of LFS or BLFS should this field be 0 for
> >> all rows?
> dump is a command that uses those fields. We do build dump in LFS or
> BLFS, but someone might want to use that.
> dump is really obsolete. The better command is rsync.
> In any case, the traditional interpretation is that file systems that
> need to be saved/backed up (i.e. dumped) are 1, and pseudo file systems
> are 0. I see no reason to change that.
Is there anything in the bootscripts that would take advantage of this field? a
quick grep doesn't show any relevant dump hits (lfs and blfs.) A quick scan of
the rsync manpage and a grep fstab on the sources doesn't yield any hits
either. Marking something true when it's not used seems incorrect to me, even
if it doesn't hurt anything.
> > CCing because I think it may be appropriate to modify the book?
> > The sample /etc/fstab in chapter 8 has the mount point listed as swap,
> > the man
> > page says:
> > The second field, (fs_file), describes the mount point for the
> >filesystem. For
> > swap partitions,
> > this field should be specified as `none'. If the name of the mount
> > contains spaces these
> > can be escaped as `\040'.
> That's was the man page says, but RedHat uses 'swap'. Ubuntu uses
> 'none'. In practice, the mount point is ignored if the type is swap.
> It doesn't make any practical difference.
> I can go either way.
I'd like the book to be consistent with the man pages that we install ;)
> -- Bruce
More information about the lfs-support