On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 03:11:02AM -0700, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > As I said in my previous mail, You should specify -F option to
> > create ext2/3 which has more than 2**31-1 blocks.
> > It is because of the compatibility.
>
> Oh, using -F for this is highly dangerous. That would allow mke2fs to
> run on e.g. a mounted filesystem or something. Instead use an option
> like "-E 16tb" or something.
Agreed that we shouldn't use -F, but what's the compatibility reason?
Supporting 2**31-1 blocks required bugfixes in the kernel and in
e2fsprogs, yes, but if it's not a filesystem format change, but rather
a "kernel had bugs which have now been fixed" statement, that's not
the sort of thing where I'd think forcing the system administrator to
add a magic command-line flag would be necessary or desirable.
I could see printing a warning message saying that older kernels might
have problems with this, and I could also imagine including with the
kernel patch enabling some sort of flag that could be queried, perhaps
via /sys/fs/ext3/32bit-nr-blocks so that if it isn't present, mke2fs
could give a more emphatic warning that the current kernel wouldn't be
able to deal with filesystems being created.
- Ted
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
