Re: [REVIEW] Don't make lazy counters default for mkfs

[Timothy Shimmin <tes@xxxxxxx>]

Nathan Scott wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 17:19 -0600, Russell Cattelan wrote:
> > > I thought about that; xfs *could* stick someting in /proc/fs/xfs
> > with
> > > supported features or somesuch.
> > >
> > > But, the kernel you mkfs under isn't necessarily the one you're
> > going to
> > > need to fall back to tomorrow, though...
> > >
> > >   
> > True but at least it could make a bit of a intelligent decision.
> > and maybe a warning for a while about potentially incompatible flags. 
> Might also be a good idea to require -f to force a mkfs of a filesystem
> which the kernel doesn't support.
        
974981: mkfs.xfs should warn if it is about to create a fs that cannot be 
mounted

Ivan was wanting this in December last year. Remember, Mark?
He wanted to know what XFS features the running kernel supported?

I don't think Dave (dgc) and others were not so keen on it IIRC.

(Seems fine to me:)

--Tim