On Wed, 28 May 2008 02:26:05 +1000, Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> wrote:
In the past we had quite a few cases where we told people to run
xfs_repair -n instead of xfs_check. I think that makes a lot of sense
because xfs_repair -n generally gives output at least as useful as
xfs_check if not more so and also is a lot faster. Is there any reason
why we shouldn't simply kill xfs_check and replaced it with a wrapper
around xfs_repair?
It's on my "todo" list! Some stuff called case-insensitive support is
delaying work like that :)
|