xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: no quota output if no usage?

To: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: no quota output if no usage?
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:40:06 -0600
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20141127093225.GB30152@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <5476297F.8080304@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20141126212144.GD9561@dastard> <54764582.6000005@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20141126221845.GE9561@dastard> <54767030.7070706@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20141127093225.GB30152@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 11/27/14 3:32 AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Wed 26-11-14 18:28:32, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 11/26/14 4:18 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
>>
>>>> Or am I missing something ...
>>>
>>> Nope, I'm confusing different reporting command behaviour....
>>
>> Ok, so back to the original question: think it's cool to drop
>> the verbose requirement to find out limits when there is 0 usage?
>   Just as a data point quota(1) command from quota-tools also doesn't
> report quota entries where no space & inode is accounted without -v option.
> I never thought it's particularly useful but apparently it's some heritage
> from the original implementation of quota in some Unix and so I decided to
> maintain compatibility...

Thanks - sounds like maybe the weight of history is behind this.  Perhaps
it'll just be a documentation fix to clarify what happens when there's no
block or inode used.

-Eric

>                                                               Honza
> 

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>