Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-09 Thread Ted Unangst
gwes wrote: > > > On 02/08/19 15:35, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > > > I think it's fair to give the user a chance to understand why > > scan_ffs(8) won't help in this case. > > > > ok? > > > > > > --- scan_ffs.8.~1.16.~ Mon Mar 24 00:28:46 2008 > > +++ scan_ffs.8 Fri Feb 8

Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-08 Thread gwes
On 02/08/19 15:35, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: I think it's fair to give the user a chance to understand why scan_ffs(8) won't help in this case. ok? --- scan_ffs.8.~1.16.~ Mon Mar 24 00:28:46 2008 +++ scan_ffs.8 Fri Feb 8 21:31:10 2019 @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ you out of a jam when

Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-08 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 11:11:31PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > On Fri, Feb 08 2019, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > > Jason McIntyre wrote: > > > >> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 09:35:35PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > >> > > >> > > >> > I think it's fair to give the user a chance

Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-08 Thread Jeremie Courreges-Anglas
On Fri, Feb 08 2019, "Theo de Raadt" wrote: > Jason McIntyre wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 09:35:35PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: >> > >> > >> > I think it's fair to give the user a chance to understand why >> > scan_ffs(8) won't help in this case. >> > >> > ok? >> > >> >>

Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-08 Thread Theo de Raadt
Jason McIntyre wrote: > On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 09:35:35PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > > > > > I think it's fair to give the user a chance to understand why > > scan_ffs(8) won't help in this case. > > > > ok? > > > > hi. > > i'm not sure if it's a bug, but it sure seems

Re: scan_ffs(8) and FFS2 filesystems

2019-02-08 Thread Jason McIntyre
On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 09:35:35PM +0100, Jeremie Courreges-Anglas wrote: > > > I think it's fair to give the user a chance to understand why > scan_ffs(8) won't help in this case. > > ok? > hi. i'm not sure if it's a bug, but it sure seems relevant. i would be tempted to be much more