From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com>
Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id
	q1CNlRrj216691 for <xfs@oss.sgi.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:47:27 -0600
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 18:47:20 -0500
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfsdump: use the full 32-bit generation number
Message-ID: <20120212234720.GA3848@infradead.org>
References: <1328813180-29095-1-git-send-email-wkendall@sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1328813180-29095-1-git-send-email-wkendall@sgi.com>
List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI <xfs.oss.sgi.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/options/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs>
List-Post: <mailto:xfs@oss.sgi.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs>,
	<mailto:xfs-request@oss.sgi.com?subject=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: Bill Kendall <wkendall@sgi.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com

Looks generally good to me, but is there any good reason to not make
the -K argument extensible by requiring a version argument, even if
that one currently only supports 2 and 3 as valid values?

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs