Jost Tobias Springenberg wrote:
I do not want to sound offensive here but I don't get the point of this
discussion at all.
What exactly is wrong with null mounts and / or the way PFS work ?
If you want to have seperate partitions instead of PFS, thats perfectly fine, nobody
forces you to use
Matthew Dillon wrote:
There are several reasons for using PFSs.
EUREKA!
Matt - you've re-invented Ramphotyphlops braminus:
Weigh this:
PFS = Parthenogenetic File System
hammer pfs-master = select a host.
hammer pfs-slave = induce ovulation.
hammer mirror-copy = self-inseminate
-- Forwarded message --
From: Colin Adams colinpaulad...@googlemail.com
Date: 2009/2/18
Subject: Re: EUREKA - was the 'why' of pseudofs
To: Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org
2009/2/18 Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org:
Proven pattern among Odontata, too:
http://ecoevo.uvigo.es
Colin Adams wrote:
-- Forwarded message --
From: Colin Adams colinpaulad...@googlemail.com
Date: 2009/2/18
Subject: Re: EUREKA - was the 'why' of pseudofs
2009/2/18 Bill Hacker w...@conducive.org:
Proven pattern among Odontata, too:
http://ecoevo.uvigo.es/Olalla/index_en.htm
Folks,
Google was no help, and I have only the last 54,000 or so of the
DragonFlyBSD newsgroup messages to hand on on the PowerBook, wherein a
message-body search on pfs, PFS, pseudofs turned up only about 240 or so
messages, or Mark One eyeball processing..
That now done, I find:
Several
