From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 02 Mar 2008 16:24:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.168.28]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id m230ODQ0029452 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:24:14 -0800 Received: from postoffice.aconex.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id BC8CC124BCC3 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from postoffice.aconex.com (prod.aconex.com [203.89.192.138]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 7whER3PxB6Foh4ed for ; Sun, 02 Mar 2008 16:24:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [REVIEW] Don't make lazy counters default for mkfs From: Nathan Scott Reply-To: nscott@aconex.com In-Reply-To: <47CB43EE.3060405@sgi.com> References: <1204166101.13569.102.camel@edge.scott.net.au> <47C87775.2010007@thebarn.com> <47C89137.3070805@sandeen.net> <47C89303.7070902@thebarn.com> <1204500895.10190.3.camel@edge.scott.net.au> <47CB43EE.3060405@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 11:24:09 +1100 Message-Id: <1204503849.10190.26.camel@edge.scott.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: xfs To: Donald Douwsma Cc: Russell Cattelan , Eric Sandeen , Barry Naujok , "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 11:18 +1100, Donald Douwsma wrote: > > > Could work but I dont like the idea of using -f for anything but > mkfsing an > existing filesystem. If that becomes habit for people it could lead to > disasters. Its already used for more than just overwriting existing filesystems. :) And it is already habit for some people. Which leads to disasters, yes. Its not a perfect system, but there's only so much you can do for people before they shoot themselves in the foot. -- Nathan