|From:||Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>|
|Date:||Tue, 27 May 2008 18:26:05 +0200|
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?
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|