> > > Ah, yes!  I had forgotten about that.  The level 2 ffs created by newfs is
> > > incompatible with the installer...something else to go into the FAQ if
> > > it's not already there ;-)  As for changing the default, since newfs is
> > > pretty much architecture independent, I'm not too sure they other ports
> > > would like us messing with their newfs ;-)
> > 
> > I assume mac68k distributes some of the /etc files separately, right?  How
> > about something like "alias newfs 'newfs -whatever'" (forgive the lousy
> > syntax) in root's profile or something?  Or another possibility, tweak the
> > newfs code so the default is changable with a makefile option, then change
> > the option for mac68k compiles....
> > 
> 
> Well, athough I don't think that the Bourne shell supports aliasing
> (although ours is POSIX compliant, whatever that means ;-)...I'm still not
> too sure that kind of thing is the real answer.  Rather, it should
> probably be documented somewhere like the manual page (which I'll assume
> that it is) and maybe the INSTALL doc.  If a user doesn't read the docs, I
> don't think we're obligated to protect him from himself (besides, if he
> hit's this snag, he's probably just done it, and it's rather easy to fix
> at this point without losing any data).

I've got to agree. I think the two things to do are to document the
fact that the installer needs old FS's, and to fix the installer.

I'd rather not use an alias to fix the problem, as there are times
when you need a more-modern fs (like if you want to use a unionfs
and need whiteouts).

Take care,

Bill