[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFz+n6uE7hRB=2mxeLiaVK8qTwjfSU_f_sAMY7kK0AG0sg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 15:39:38 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Raymond Jennings <shentino@...il.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Ext3 removal, quota & udf fixes
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Raymond Jennings <shentino@...il.com> wrote:
>
> That said, I wouldn't mind myself if the ext4 driver were given a very
> grueling regression test to make sure it can actually handle old ext3
> systems as well as the ext3 driver can.
That's not my only worry. Things like "can you go back to ext3-only"
is an issue too - I don't think that's been a big priority for ext4
any more, and if there are any existing hold-outs that still use ext3,
they may want to be able to go back to old kernels.
So it's not just a "you can use ext4 instead" issue. Can you do that
*without* then forcing an upgrade forever on that partition? I'm not
sure the ext4 people are really even willing to guarantee that kind of
backwards compatibility.
I could be ok with removing ext3 in theory, but I haven't seen a lot
of rationale for it, and I don't know if there are still users who may
have their own good reasons to stay with ext3. Maybe there has been
lots of discussion about this on fsdevel (which I don't follow), and
I'm just lacking the background, but if so I want to see that
background. Not just a oneliner description that basically says
"remove ext3 support".
Linus
--
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