On 30 Aug 2021, at 11:56, schumaker.anna@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > From: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@xxxxxxxxxx> > > okay, or would it be better to name it "nfs" with "sysfs" as a > subcommand? Going with just "nfs" as the command name would allow us to > add other non-sysfs tools as subcommands in the future (such as `nfs stat` > to call `nfsstat`, or for new commands that would otherwise be prefixed > with "nfs") > > Thoughts? I'm in favor of having a top-level nfs command tree for tools and administrators, and even dropping the intermediate "sysfs" bit for these subcommands. I'd like to use `nfs xprt` and `nfs rpc-client`..etc. I think that the intermediate 'sysfs' is unnecessary. If I can ever get around to completing it, I have some work for displaying mount to xprt relationships and forcibly unmounting for unavailable servers where I would like to use `nfs shutdown` or some variation. Ben
