Hi,
IMHO the first one is the right one. The quota clean flag would be invalidated
by first space change when quotas are not on, and quotacheck would
be forced (probably by quotaon ?) before the quotas would be enabled. This
shouldn't be probably very hard to check (famous last words :)

Jaromir

Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not happy with the way quota works currently: even after a clean reboot
> quotacheck is run, which can take some time on a big filesystem.
> My first though was to add a flag similar to the FFS clean flag, which can
> tell if the quota file contains accurate informations. I've done this by
> adding some fields at the head of the quota file (a magic number, a revision
> number and flags). This means the format changes, I hacked quotacheck to
> convert and old quota file to a new one. The clean flag is set by quotacheck,
> or by the kernel at quotaoff time (which is called at umount time). It's
> cleared at quotaon time.
> 
> This sheme works fine most of the time, but the fact that mount and quota are
> separate can lead to inconsistencies: we can mount the filesystem and
> change it, whithout changing quotas. To have a coherent system I think this
> (quotacheck/quotaon) should be integrated in the filesystem: quotacheck
> can be integrated to fsck, and quotaon can happen at mount time (this can
> be controlled with tunefs for example). The counterpart is that we can't
> have the quota file in an arbitrary place, but I don't think it's a real
> problem: the quota file can live in the filesystem itself, we just have to
> agree on a name (quota.users and quota.groups ?).
> 
> Comments please ?
> 
> --
> Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
> --
> 


-- 
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org>      http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
@@@@  Wanna a real operating system ? Go and get NetBSD, damn!  @@@@