| To: | Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version |
| From: | "aluno3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <aluno3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 26 Nov 2015 14:18:51 +0100 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20151126132638.53ed9fc7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <5656DD39.8060403@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20151126132638.53ed9fc7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 |
Yes I used -f option with 4.X version of xfsprogs but mounting the volume was not possible - before mkfs.xfs finished successfully (mkfs.xfs -f -m crc=0,finobt=0). Should I stay in 3.1.X family of xfsprogs or is it recommended to use at least 3.2.x version with kernel 3.10? The most I care about xfs_repair. On 11/26/15 13:26, Emmanuel Florac wrote: > Le Thu, 26 Nov 2015 11:21:45 +0100 > "aluno3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <aluno3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Ãcrivait: > >> mkfs.xfs -m crc=0,finobt=0 >> >> but it does not work with 4.X version of xfsprogs. Call trace also >> occurred so I tried to use 3.2.4 family with crc=0,finobt=0 and volume >> mounted successfully. >> > > Did you use -f? else mkfs.xfs won't do anything as it'll detect an > existing filesystem. > |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version, Emmanuel Florac |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH v2] xfs: send warning of project quota to userspace via netlink, Brian Foster |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version, Emmanuel Florac |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Which xfsprogs version to which kernel version, Brian Foster |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |