> > Then you have never set up guest crypto. :-)
I no speak English. :-) Unlike you, I have tended > to have far more comments on LINKs than on MDISKs, since I care more about > *why* a user is linking rather than *what* is on the disk. OK, LINK is crying too, but less so because it has more free space than MDISK MINIOPT already established the precedent of a statement that adds > information to the previous statement. It was my intent to keep that > model, but provide a more generally useful function. Further, I most > especially didn't want to compromise the syntactical integrity of existing > statements. I agree. I suggested "preceeding" to visually distinguish it from MINIOPT, but if you want to provide a general COMMENT statement tied to any preceeding statement, I'm all for it. As to QUERY MDISK, it could be done of course, but QUERY VIRTUAL has the > advantage of being able to handle all virtual devices, not just MDISKS. Again, I'm all for it. I was (maybe naively) going for a minimum effort, and response to QUERY MDISK has a lot of free space. Ivica Brodaric
