On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:10:03PM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote: > Ceri Davies schrieb: > > On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:09:19PM +0000, Stefan Esser wrote: > >> se 2007-10-15 22:09:19 UTC > >> > >> FreeBSD src repository > >> > >> Modified files: > >> usr.bin/locate/locate updatedb.sh > >> Log: > >> Make the updatedb script installed as /usr/libexec/locate.updatedb > >> inspect all local file systems, not only ufs and ext2fs. A number > >> of local file systems has been added over time, and at least zfs > >> has the potential to become a popular choice. Without this change > >> a ZFS root file system causes the script to ignore all file-systems > >> and leads to an empty locate db. (An alternative is to add all the > >> relevant file systems individually, which means that at least zfs, > >> xfs, ntfs, ntfs-3g, msdosfs should be added, probably more). > > > > This now includes /dev, /dev/fd, /proc, /compat/linux/proc, CD-ROMs and DVDs > > as well as duplicating everything in nullfs mounts, all of which are > > probably > > undesirable -- well, they are undesirable to me; whether they are to > > others is the question ;-). > > Ok, thank you for the information. I did not notice this in my tests. > > I'm not sure what the "local" pseudo fs-type is meant to be used for. > Currently it appears to be identical to "not-remote" (which is what > the locate db update tries to avoid, due to high network load and > scan time). > > I plan to fix this within the next 24 hours (if anybody thinks it needs > to be backed-out immediately, I'm willing to do this, but I'd rather > put in the correct fix instead. > > Two possibilities: We could have another pseudo fs-type in find, which > selects "real" file systems (and skips devfs, procfs, fdescfs, nullfs > and probably more). Scanning of removable devices is dubious, too, > independently of their file system. By selecting "local" and "disk > based" file systems (which would omit not only the pseudo file-systems > and nullfs, but also cd9660 and udf), no specific file systems needed > to be put into the script (and find would have the knowledge).
While userland can tell if a filesystem is pseudo or not, (see lsvfs),
I'm not sure that we can reliably tell whether a device is removable or
not (cf. my camera, USB key, iPod, etc.).
> The second possibility is to extend the list in the update script. It
> needs to contain at least:
>
> ufs ext2fs zfs
>
> and probably also:
>
> xfs msdosfs ntfs ntfs-3g (?)
>
> Did I forget any?
>
> In fact, I'd rather enter "ufs ext2fs zfs xfs msdosfs ntfs" right now,
> instead of relying on the pseudo-fs definition in find, now that I think
> about it.
I think that's probably the best idea too.
Thanks for working on this!
Ceri
--
That must be wonderful! I don't understand it at all.
-- Moliere
pgpYHwsu2PP4N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
