xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version

To: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version
From: Arkadiusz MiÅkiewicz <arekm@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 18:07:47 +0100
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=maven.pl; s=maven; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id; bh=j/xOyH/ThfXmjVdBW0AvW9cRchYtueAecHeL0v65UJc=; b=ma81+lIHCF9u7mezcaloFMOd+q4h0ilunE19uV8VE0rTmacK5yFNmdd4ewdyncN0Fw NoAOFdHCOmARc3xHaRZyQ5ATe/arXx7oLf8XTjuBFFk/laYLtlAQjOelgXC+38IvS91a G3sYWPfxXTj/uIK/fvnDkVZqM04IXAYh/P+o8=
In-reply-to: <565E826D.6040301@xxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <5656DD39.8060403@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20151201202639.GV19199@dastard> <565E826D.6040301@xxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.4.0-rc3-00005-g2255702; KDE/4.14.13; x86_64; ; )
On Wednesday 02 of December 2015, Eric Sandeen wrote:
 
> >> How about just checking running kernel version before enabling this by
> >> default?
> > 
> > The btrfs solution? No thanks.
> 
> Another option is to export features the running kernel can handle in
> sysfs & mkfs accordingly - but then somebody mkfs's under one kernel,
> boots another kernel, and gets different mkfs's, possibly fails to mount,
> etc... magically changing defaults is a nightmare.  yeah, at some point
> you have to realize that you cannot save everyone from themselves.  ;)

Don't change default. Warn instead about mkfs using feature not supported by 
current kernel.

> >> While this is some implementation effort, it may help to reduce
> >> questions on this mailing list. And as you see distro problem or not:
> >> People still ask here. :)
> 
> Like Dave said - not very often at all.

Had one complain about the problem on pld lists.

> -Eric

-- 
Arkadiusz MiÅkiewicz, arekm / ( maven.pl | pld-linux.org )

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