| To: | stress_buster <leo1783@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: xfsprogs |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 07 Apr 2011 10:22:19 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <31342497.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <31342497.post@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 |
On 4/7/11 9:04 AM, stress_buster wrote: > > Hi, > > My xfs_repair is bit old- 2.9. version. > I'm considering installing latest available. But just worried because this > is my production server and has some custom apps built into my OS. > > Is upgrading xfs_repair a high risk? No. > Also do I need to install latest xfsprogs or anyway only to upgrade > xfs_repair from the package? > I'm only would need xfs_repair mostly, so doesnt matter to me leaving > others-mkfs.xfs etc in xfsprogs at the old version if that minimises the > risk... if you really want to try newer xfs_repair only, just build an xfsprogs tree and run from inside the tree. > Any thoughts? Just upgrade. ;) -Eric |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 1/9] xfs: fix extent format buffer allocation size, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 3/9] xfs: convert ENOSPC inode flushing to use new syncd workqueue, Alex Elder |
| Previous by Thread: | xfsprogs, stress_buster |
| Next by Thread: | Re: xfsprogs, Leo Davis |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |