On 2009.12.13 17:21:10 +0100, Daniel Thiele wrote: > Since the tmpmfs option does not scale well with growing /tmp space > requirements (at least not in a cost-effective way), I am keen to know > why the patch I dug up in my first mail has never been committed. Was it > solely a lack of interest or time, or have there been other reasons? There is no discussion in the audit trail, so I think it's most likely no committer ever looked that much at it. I took a brief look, and at the very least the patch is missing an update to the rc.conf manual page. I'm not entirely convinced the way the patch goes about creating the devices etc. is the best way to do it, but I don't see any obvious problems. That said, personally I unfortunately have too many other things on my plate to commit the patch. -- Simon L. NielsenReceived on Fri Dec 18 2009 - 17:29:13 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:59 UTC