| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 17/19] xfsprogs: disable truncating of files |
| From: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 13 Apr 2016 11:17:45 -0500 |
| Delivered-to: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <CACj3i71Grs8deYRtTaGmTmgBTrge-VKQKpn1Azj_y8=KQHWbgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <1458818136-56043-1-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx> <1458818136-56043-18-git-send-email-jtulak@xxxxxxxxxx> <20160408000910.GB21804@dastard> <CACj3i73f_v=70pGrrLkRpHB-6UwiOOM2F9Sbu2aZMaJGmBLeiQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20160408230843.GE567@dastard> <CACj3i71Grs8deYRtTaGmTmgBTrge-VKQKpn1Azj_y8=KQHWbgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.2 |
On 4/13/16 10:08 AM, Jan Tulak wrote: ... > All rightâ, I will keep the O_TRUNC there. However, should it > truncate the file every time, or should we offer a way how to avoid > the file truncating? Until now, mkfs behaved differently based on > whether -d file was given, or not. Your explanation suggests that we > should truncate every time, right? There are probably valid reasons to keep size as well as to truncate; it's not immediately clear to me how we should handle it. Honestly, at this point, in the interest of getting the other fixes in, I think I might rather see the truncating behavior unchanged from what we have today; we can tackle that as a separate problem at a later date. What do you think? -Eric > > âCheers, > Janâ |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 15/19] mkfs: don't treat files as though they are block devices, Jan Tulak |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 17/19] xfsprogs: disable truncating of files, Jan Tulak |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 17/19] xfsprogs: disable truncating of files, Jan Tulak |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 17/19] xfsprogs: disable truncating of files, Jan Tulak |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |