[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DE7A557.9040608@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 09:59:35 -0500
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
To: "Amir G." <amir73il@...rs.sourceforge.net>
CC: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, xfs@....sgi.com,
linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
sergey57@...il.com, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...rs.sf.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfstests: add support for ext4dev FSTYP
On 6/2/11 2:16 AM, Amir G. wrote:
> OK, after upgrading to newer util-linux and building it from git,
> which also didn't help, I finally found who to blame - me.
> I had an old (noauto) entry in /etc/fstab which claimed that /dev/sda5 is ext4.
> fsck was picking up that entry and insisting that /dev/sda5 is ext4
> (regardless of what it really is)
> blkid isn't doing that silly thing.
>
> Amir
So where are we at with all this?
I don't really mind adding ext4dev to FSTYP case statements, it -is- something which blkid could, in theory, still return, and making xfstests cope with that and try to invoke fsck -t ext4dev doesn't bother me too much. It is sadly an fs type embedded into a few tools.
But other than that, I don't think we should be making changes to upstream projects based on your current development hacks (I don't mean hack in a bad way, just that running sed across ext4 to create your custom filesystem for testing should not require upstream projects to change...)
So I'm ok with sprinkling "ext4|ext4dev" around if necessary. Anyone else disagree?
-Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists