"Paul A. Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I don't think the GPFS use of "dev=" is documented.
That's OK. Hardly any of this is documented. What does GPFS use "dev=" for? Does the patch I sent work for GPFS? > why is the "df" command looking for "dev=" in the mount options of > filesystems which don't even support it? We don't know what file systems support dev= and what don't. It's cheap to look for dev= so we might as well do it. In the absence of better info, we assume that people use "dev=" for the same thing they've been using "dev=" for decades. This may be wrong, but I suspect that in practice it's more likely to be right than the other approach would be. > Is there a documented standard to which this conforms? There's no standard that I know of. > shouldn't the "Irix 6.5" code be conditionally compiled > only for Irix 6.5? The feature is likely to leak into other operating systems. Most likely, a file system with type "ignore" is one that we'd want to ignore anyway, even if it was defined independently. So I'd leave the code alone for now. > This won't work if "dev=" is the first option. It never is, in my experience. If it happens we could add code to support it. _______________________________________________ Bug-coreutils mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils
