From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from asav1.lyse.net ([213.167.96.68]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1EAoSJ-0003iT-Qm for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 01 Sep 2005 08:46:20 -0400 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=D8yvind?= Harboe To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rn?= Engel In-Reply-To: <20050901120030.GB694@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> References: <20050901114438.GA694@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de><1125575555.4884.9.ca mel@localhost.localdomain><20050901120030.GB694@wohnheim.fh-wedel.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2005 14:45:56 +0200 Message-Id: <1125578756.4884.10.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: PATCH: allow JFFS2 to write to really small disks List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, 2005-09-01 at 14:00 +0200, J=F6rn Engel wrote: > > But who mounts a *tiny* JFFS2 volume except those that will be using it > > as a WORM drive? >=20 > People making mistakes. It is a very important usability issue to > mark mistakes as such. Making it appear as if everything is ok and > having it fail later, possibly days or weeks later, is bad usability. >=20 > I would agree with you if the user-perceived behaviour was > *immediatly* and *noticably* different. But unless people write > enough data to fill their fs, the difference may go unnoticed. Sounds good. If I get some indication that there is a consensus from maintainers/committers to add this mount option, I'll go ahead and write it up. --=20 =D8yvind Harboe http://www.zylin.com