Re: xfs_check

["Barry Naujok" <bnaujok@xxxxxxx>]

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 :)