Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!jack!man!sdeggo!dave
From: dave@sdeggo.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: A different View of the value of OS/2 - it's better than UN
Message-ID: <94@sdeggo.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 18-Sep-87 13:21:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdeggo.94
Posted: Fri Sep 18 13:21:01 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 19-Sep-87 15:58:47 EDT
References: <494@parcvax.Xerox.COM> <713@cup.portal.com> <505@parcvax.Xerox.COM>
Organization: Lazy Programmer's Society of San Diego
Lines: 21

In article <505@parcvax.Xerox.COM>, burton@parcvax.Xerox.COM (Philip M. Burton) writes:
> It sure is, but it's also reality.  And, most people don't bak up, until after
> they have had a crash.  That's why they need a simple, robust file system,
> not something that requires fsck (sounds obscene!!) to clean up,
> and complex mount/umount commands to use floppies.

What's so complex about mount/umount?  Seem like pretty simple ideas to me.
The _implementation_ may not be the easiest to use (all those nasty device 
names!) but it could be made simpler, and in a user-friendly (oh no Mr Bill!) 
Unix, they would be.  In case you haven't noticed, the Macintosh has an implicit
mount/umount, where it's mounted when you put it in the drive and it unmounts
when you request that the floppy be ejected.  No reason that a Unix system
couldn't implement this.  In fact, the Mac will even trash your file system
for you if you don't unmount everything before you power it down.  And they
don't give you fsck (pardon my French)!

-- 
David L. Smith
{sdcsvax!sdamos,ihnp4!jack!man, hp-sdd!crash, pyramid}!sdeggo!dave
sdeggo!dave@sdamos.ucsd.edu 
"How can you tell when our network president is lying?  His lips move."