| To: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: regarding the inode64 mount option |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 28 May 2009 10:18:09 -0500 |
| Cc: | Michael Weissenbacher <mw@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20090528145612.GA14684@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <4A1E81D8.7010706@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090528145612.GA14684@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) |
Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 02:21:44PM +0200, Michael Weissenbacher ... >> I haven't found any definitive clear documentation abount the pro's >> and con's, so maybe you can give me some hints :-) > > The only reason speaking against inode64 are old buggy programs that > can't cope with a 64bit ino_t, Eric had a quite scary list of those > in Fedora somewhere.. http://sandeen.net/wordpress/?p=9 -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH, RFC] xfsprogs: add xfs_reno(8), Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2/9] Make libxfs.h optional, Christoph Hellwig |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: regarding the inode64 mount option, Christoph Hellwig |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH, RFC] xfsprogs: add xfs_reno(8), Christoph Hellwig |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |