From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda3.sgi.com [192.48.176.15]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id n08Fb9S5002732 for ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:37:13 -0600 Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:37:08 -0500 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfsdump support for 64K page size Message-ID: <20090108153708.GA30563@infradead.org> References: <4964C5EF.3060308@sgi.com> <4965629C.2000703@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4965629C.2000703@sgi.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Mark Goodwin Cc: xfs-dev , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 01:19:08PM +1100, Mark Goodwin wrote: > > > Bill Kendall wrote: > > Various fixes to allow xfsdump/xfsrestore to work with 64K > > page size. This is essentially Chinner's patch from a while > > back. > > > > Signed-off-by: Bill Kendall > > Lachlan reviewed and ack'd this on an internal list and I've committed > it (on Bill's behalf) as follows : > > git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfsdump.git > commit 9502587dbbfdd465958889a568dc2842f10b1ff9 > Author: Mark Goodwin > Date: Thu Jan 8 12:37:53 2009 +1100 > > Various fixes to allow xfsdump/xfsrestore to work with 64K > page size. This is essentially Chinner's patch from a while > back. > > Signed-off-by: Bill Kendall > Signed-off-by: Lachlan McIlroy > Signed-off-by: Mark Goodwin > > and for the libhandle changes : If you commit something on someone else's behalf please use the --author argument to git-commit so that it shows up as coming from that author in the git version history. Or just use git-am on the patch mail which will sort out all this by itself. > This introduces a dependency between xfsdump and libhandle (in xfsprogs), > which may or may not be an issue now that the cmds are in split trees. It's not a new depdency. xfsdump depended on libhandle for a long time (and before it did depend on dmapi IIRC). Just to actually get dump properly working with 64k pages you need the most uptodate version of both packages. > I guess maybe xfsdump/restore should rightfully be part of xfsprogs? I think having them split makes a lot of sense as many people don't need dump. What we should eventually do is to move xfs_fsr over to xfsprogs. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs