Re: [PATCH] Refuse to install on XFS destroying its superblock

[Robert Millan <rmh@aybabtu.com>]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 01:43:37PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> Robert Millan wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:18:05AM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >   
> >>  2009-10-16  Vladimir Serbinenko  <phcoder@gmail.com>
> >>  
> >> +	* util/i386/pc/grub-setup.c (setup): Refuse to overwrite XFS superblock.
> >> +	(options): New option --destroy-xfs.
> >> +	(main): Handle --destroy-xfs.
> >>     
> >
> > I gave this some more thought, and I think this could be less ad-hoc.  We're
> > treating XFS as if it were a "weird", unique thing just because it isn't biased
> > towards DOS-style boot like most filesystems are.
> >
> > Instead, I've done something more generic, using our standard filesystem
> > probing engine which should be more reliable than a single memcmp.
> >
> >   
> The danger is that fs_probe may reject filesystem as valid just because
> it's newer than expected.

What do you mean with "reject filesystem as valid"?

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."