On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 11:30:14AM +1100, Mark Goodwin wrote:
> Maybe I'm missing something, but if we export all the feature bits,
> both new and old, then (a) an old mkfs will continue to ignore them,
> and (b) future versions of mkfs will have all the information needed,
> but will need t be smart about how that information is used.
1) mkfs should make a filesystem, the defaults should be conservative (say
using features that have been around >1 year)
2) xfs should export supported features to userspace
3) if you want to make sure that the fs you create will be mountable with
your current kernel, write a small shell script or something along those
lines that reads the features from some kernel interface, and based on
those passes the right options to mkfs
4) if you just use mkfs and it creates a fs that's incompatible with your
current kernel, the mount will fail - as it does today, but perhaps a
less cryptic error message would be in order
Since installers are just gigantic wrappers around basic commands like mkfs,
#3 gets nicely covered.
Josef 'Jeff' Sipek.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
depends on the unreasonable man.
- George Bernard Shaw