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 (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id n7U8i8S2014373 for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 03:44:18 -0500 Received: from mailsrv5.zmi.at (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cuda.sgi.com (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id E59EF1B83D22 for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv5.zmi.at (mailsrv5.zmi.at [212.69.164.54]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id P0eLkEcJZ1SGhWRW for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailsrv.i.zmi.at (h081217106033.dyn.cm.kabsi.at [81.217.106.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mailsrv2.i.zmi.at", Issuer "power4u.zmi.at" (not verified)) by mailsrv5.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9295C3D1 for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 10:44:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from saturn.localnet (saturn.i.zmi.at [10.72.27.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mailsrv.i.zmi.at (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5386940015E for ; Sun, 30 Aug 2009 10:44:23 +0200 (CEST) From: Michael Monnerie Subject: Re: pushing out a new xfsprogs release, was Re: [PATCH] xfsprogs: fix unaligned access in libxfs Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 10:44:03 +0200 References: <20090828153718.GA26409@infradead.org> <200908300017.07268@zmi.at> <4A99D43D.5050208@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <4A99D43D.5050208@sandeen.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200908301044.03807@zmi.at> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Sonntag 30 August 2009 Eric Sandeen wrote: > Afraid I haven't fixed that one yet, sorry. =A0If you could open a bug > on xfs.org's bugzilla it'd be much better for tracking ... OK, looked there, but there are only 2 links: to kernel.org or = oss.sgi.com bugzillas. Which one should I use? BTW, wouldn't it be better to declare on the Wiki which bugzilla to use? > I did find that building xfsprogs w/o debug ASSERTs turned on, I > could get a clean fs after 2 runs, just to get you going again... What would I need to take out exactly? Sorry, I don't know what "debug = ASSERTs" are. I've seen from patches sent here those are commands, but = which ones are for debug? mfg zmi -- = // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at // Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 .network.your.ideas. // PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import" // Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4 // Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4 _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs