cvs commit: src/usr.bin/locate/locate updatedb.sh

[Alexey Dokuchaev]

On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 07:10:03PM +0200, Stefan Esser wrote:
> Ceri Davies schrieb:
> > On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 10:09:19PM +0000, Stefan Esser wrote:
> >> se          2007-10-15 22:09:19 UTC
> >>
> >>   FreeBSD src repository
> >>
> >>   Modified files:
> >>     usr.bin/locate/locate updatedb.sh 
> >>   Log:
> >>   Make the updatedb script installed as /usr/libexec/locate.updatedb
> >>   inspect all local file systems, not only ufs and ext2fs. A number
> >>   of local file systems has been added over time, and at least zfs
> >>   has the potential to become a popular choice. Without this change
> >>   a ZFS root file system causes the script to ignore all file-systems
> >>   and leads to an empty locate db. (An alternative is to add all the
> >>   relevant file systems individually, which means that at least zfs,
> >>   xfs, ntfs, ntfs-3g, msdosfs should be added, probably more).
> > 
> > This now includes /dev, /dev/fd, /proc, /compat/linux/proc, CD-ROMs and DVDs
> > as well as duplicating everything in nullfs mounts, all of which are probably
> > undesirable -- well, they are undesirable to me; whether they are to
> > others is the question ;-).
> 
> Ok, thank you for the information. I did not notice this in my tests.
> 
> I'm not sure what the "local" pseudo fs-type is meant to be used for.
> Currently it appears to be identical to "not-remote" (which is what
> the locate db update tries to avoid, due to high network load and
> scan time).
> 
> I plan to fix this within the next 24 hours (if anybody thinks it needs
> to be backed-out immediately, I'm willing to do this, but I'd rather
> put in the correct fix instead.
> 
> Two possibilities: We could have another pseudo fs-type in find, which
> selects "real" file systems (and skips devfs, procfs, fdescfs, nullfs
> and probably more). Scanning of removable devices is dubious, too,
> independently of their file system. By selecting "local" and "disk
> based" file systems (which would omit not only the pseudo file-systems
> and nullfs, but also cd9660 and udf), no specific file systems needed
> to be put into the script (and find would have the knowledge).
> 
> The second possibility is to extend the list in the update script. It
> needs to contain at least:
> 
> 	ufs ext2fs zfs
> 
> and probably also:
> 
> 	xfs msdosfs ntfs ntfs-3g (?)

It might be a good idea to drop msdosfs off of this list.  Real physical
filesystems in Windoze world are typically NTFS now, and FAT is used
mainly in removable storage.

./danfe