Typo in mkfs man-page

Typo in mkfs man-page

[Kenny Rachuonyo]

The short form of the --verbose option should probably be -v instead of -V

This occurs both on the online man-page:

http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mkfs.8.html

and my local system (Ubuntu 12.04) man-page.

-- 
http://dumaworks.com
https://github.com/krmboya
http://keyboardinterrupt.blogspot.com

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Karel Zak]

On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:38:31AM +0300, Kenny Rachuonyo wrote:
> The short form of the --verbose option should probably be -v instead of -V
> 
> This occurs both on the online man-page:
> 
> http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mkfs.8.html
> 
> and my local system (Ubuntu 12.04) man-page.

 I think this historical mess is well explained in the man page. 

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Theodore Ts'o]

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:35:45PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:38:31AM +0300, Kenny Rachuonyo wrote:
> > The short form of the --verbose option should probably be -v instead of -V
> > 
> > This occurs both on the online man-page:
> > 
> > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mkfs.8.html
> > 
> > and my local system (Ubuntu 12.04) man-page.
> 
>  I think this historical mess is well explained in the man page. 

I'll add that I've never been convinced that the mkfs front end is all
that useful.  It's probably better for people to explicitly run
/sbin/mkfs.xfs, /sbin/mkfs.ext4, etc.., so you don't have to worry
about which options get passed down to the file system specific mkfs
program, and which ones are interpreted by /sbin/mkfs --- and I don't
believe /sbin/mkfs adds enough (err, any?) value that using
"/sbin/mkfs -t xxx" vs "/sbin/mkfs.xxx" makes any sense whatsoever.

At least with /sbin/fsck it runs multiple fsck programs in parallel,
and it serves as a front-end program so you don't have to modify the
init scripts if you change your root file system from reiserfs to jfs,
while keeping some of your other file systems as minixfs.  So
/sbin/fsck adds value.

But /sbin/mkfs.xxx is generally run by system administrators, and IMHO
it's better to tell people to run the command "/sbin/mkfs.xxx" instead
of "/sbin/mkfs -t xxx".

Cheers,

					- Ted

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Dale R. Worley]

> From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>

> But /sbin/mkfs.xxx is generally run by system administrators, and IMHO
> it's better to tell people to run the command "/sbin/mkfs.xxx" instead
> of "/sbin/mkfs -t xxx".

This makes sense to me.

More exactly, mkfs is generally run "manually".

And while having fsck "do what I mean" is largely safe, creating a
file system is not the time that you want the user to be unclear on
the exact implications of each option he has specified.

Dale

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Sami Kerola]

On 10 February 2014 20:55, Dale R. Worley <worley@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
>
>> But /sbin/mkfs.xxx is generally run by system administrators, and IMHO
>> it's better to tell people to run the command "/sbin/mkfs.xxx" instead
>> of "/sbin/mkfs -t xxx".
>
> This makes sense to me.
>
> More exactly, mkfs is generally run "manually".
>
> And while having fsck "do what I mean" is largely safe, creating a
> file system is not the time that you want the user to be unclear on
> the exact implications of each option he has specified.

Would it make sense to add banner 'you probably should not run this
utility, consider using file system specific mkfs' to mkfs?

-- 
Sami Kerola
http://www.iki.fi/kerolasa/

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Karel Zak]

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 09:05:32AM +0000, Sami Kerola wrote:
> On 10 February 2014 20:55, Dale R. Worley <worley@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >> From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
> >
> >> But /sbin/mkfs.xxx is generally run by system administrators, and IMHO
> >> it's better to tell people to run the command "/sbin/mkfs.xxx" instead
> >> of "/sbin/mkfs -t xxx".
> >
> > This makes sense to me.
> >
> > More exactly, mkfs is generally run "manually".
> >
> > And while having fsck "do what I mean" is largely safe, creating a
> > file system is not the time that you want the user to be unclear on
> > the exact implications of each option he has specified.
> 
> Would it make sense to add banner 'you probably should not run this
> utility, consider using file system specific mkfs' to mkfs?

And mark it deprecated and one day kill it at all.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Dale R. Worley]

> From: Sami Kerola <kerolasa@iki.fi>

> Would it make sense to add banner 'you probably should not run this
> utility, consider using file system specific mkfs' to mkfs?

That makes sense to me.

Dale

Re: Typo in mkfs man-page

[Karel Zak]

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 01:57:41PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 06:35:45PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 10:38:31AM +0300, Kenny Rachuonyo wrote:
> > > The short form of the --verbose option should probably be -v instead of -V
> > > 
> > > This occurs both on the online man-page:
> > > 
> > > http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/mkfs.8.html
> > > 
> > > and my local system (Ubuntu 12.04) man-page.
> > 
> >  I think this historical mess is well explained in the man page. 
> 
> I'll add that I've never been convinced that the mkfs front end is all
> that useful.  It's probably better for people to explicitly run

Good point, I have marked the wrapper as deprecated.

    Karel

-- 
 Karel Zak  <kzak@redhat.com>
 http://karelzak.blogspot.com