From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40241 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755004Ab3BZAY6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 19:24:58 -0500 Message-ID: <512BFCD1.3030709@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 18:07:45 -0600 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tsutomu Itoh CC: chris.mason@fusionio.com, linux-btrfs , Stefan Behrens , David Sterba Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] btrfs-progs: require mkfs -f force option to overwrite filesystem or partition table References: <511D2D2B.8040804@redhat.com> <5124EDAB.5020003@giantdisaster.de> <512BF648.1090602@jp.fujitsu.com> In-Reply-To: <512BF648.1090602@jp.fujitsu.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2/25/13 5:39 PM, Tsutomu Itoh wrote: > On 2013/02/21 0:37, Stefan Behrens wrote: >> On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 12:30:03 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> The core of this is shamelessly stolen from xfsprogs. >>> >>> Use blkid to detect an existing filesystem or partition >>> table on any of the target devices. If something is found, >>> require the '-f' option to overwrite it, hopefully avoiding >>> disaster due to mistyped devicenames, etc. >>> >>> # mkfs.btrfs /dev/sda1 >>> >>> WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-59-gd00279c-dirty IS EXPERIMENTAL >>> WARNING! - see http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org before using >>> >>> /dev/sda1 appears to contain an existing filesystem (xfs). >>> Use the -f option to force overwrite. >>> # >>> >>> This does introduce a requirement on libblkid. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen >> >> This means that it is now required to change all occurrences of >> "mkfs.btrfs" to "mkfs.btrfs -f" everywhere. Can't we first establish a > > I also think so. > It means -f is not significant to me, I think. > (Most of my test scripts fails without -f. So I'll always type "mkfs.btrfs -f") > > Therefore I want you to revert commit:2a2d8e1962e8b6cda7b0a7584f6d2fb95d442cb6. > btrfs-progs: require mkfs -f force option to overwrite filesystem or partition table > > How do you think about it? What if you submit a patch to look at an environment variable, BTRFS_CLOBBERS_ALL=1 which causes it to not require -f to overwrite? Then you can just set it once at the top of your test environment, and not change every instance? Otherwise, I guess I think: WARNING! - Btrfs v0.20-rc1-212-gf6ef8b5 IS EXPERIMENTAL and we need to expect that things might change ... -Eric > Thanks, > Tsutomu > >> time period of 100 years where the -f option is tolerated and ignored, >> and then in 2113 we require that the users add the -f option? >> >> (Just had to do this string replacement everywhere, and had to add -f to >> xfstest's _scratch_mkfs in common.rc as well). Sigh. >> >