On 2/14/13 2:36 AM, Lukáš Czerner wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 00:29:59 -0700
>> From: Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: Karel Zak <kzak@xxxxxxxxxx>, Lukáš Czerner <lczerner@xxxxxxxxxx>,
>> xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx, Zach Brown <zabrown@xxxxxxxxxx>,
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs_mkfs: wipe old signatures from the device
>> On Feb 13, 2013, at 3:17 PM, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> it is the responsibility of filesystem
>>> tools to behave sanely, not for the rest of the world to have to
>>> work around the dangerous behaviour of a specific filesystems'
>> I appreciate this, and in particular that mkfs.xfs doesn't nerf a file
>> system without the use of -f; even an existing XFS file system. Considering
>> most data loss is user induced, I'd appreciate it if other file systems's
>> tools weren't so easily made belligerent by (hopefully temporarily) confused
>> apes wearing pants.
>> Chris Murphy
> I would not be so optimistic about it. The reason being that there
> are almost _always_ old file system signatures on the device. So I
> think that it got to the point where users will usually use mkfs.xfs
> -f all the time.
I know I do ;) But as Dave points out, fs developers are odd ducks.
> And even if they did not and they would use a wrong
> device they would probably get the same warning even for the device
> they wanted to use in the first place.
I was thinking, as annoying as it might be, requiring the user to
use "-f $OLD_FS_TYPE" might require a bit more positive action
and cognition on the admin's part.
OTOH, that could get annoying, and break old scripts. :)
> So even thoug it might help in some cases I do not think that we
> should go and change all file systems to do that as well, it would
> not be very useful anyway.