Andreas Kohn wrote:
> Encoding "dfly" in the filename adds redundancy which will annoy you
> later.
>
> - Porting the journaling stuff to other systems would certainly not
> include the name "dflymnt.conf", but the port would call it "lxmnt.conf"
> or "fbsdmnt.conf". This would add to more confusion in the long run.
> Some generic name that describes the file content and intent would be
> better. This is not that far-fetched, think of FireFlyBSD etc.
>
> - Renaming DragonFlyBSD to something else would also leave you with this
> dfly which you cannot change. Also not too far-fetched, think
> TurtleBSD :)
>
> Shorting the mount to mnt might also not be that good an idea, image you
> remember "there was a file for configuring mount stuff, and it was not
> fstab", your UN*X skills would tell you "look in /etc", but
> "ls /etc/*mount*" returns nothing. "ls /etc/*.conf" would return the
> filename, but it might fall through your expected search pattern more
> easily.
>
> So, conclusion: I think mount[ctl].conf is a better name.
>
> My 2c,
> Andreas
>
>
You may be interested in the '/fs' hierarchy that Paul Jarc uses:
http://multivac.cwru.edu