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 q9IH38sj202307 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:03:08 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id sqUG4fxfGjXjJltE for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:04:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q9IH4kKU000341 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:04:46 -0400 Received: from andromeda.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-113-113.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.113]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q9IH4hRM011232 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:04:45 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:04:42 -0300 From: Carlos Maiolino Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfs: Update mount options documentation Message-ID: <20121018170442.GA6634@andromeda.usersys.redhat.com> References: <1350574138-30305-1-git-send-email-cmaiolino@redhat.com> <5080253A.9060906@sgi.com> <5080279C.8030702@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> <508028CC.5080800@sgi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <508028CC.5080800@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: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:05:32AM -0500, Mark Tinguely wrote: > On 10/18/12 11:00, Dave Howorth wrote: > >Mark Tinguely wrote: > >>Would "Indicates that XFS is allowed to create inodes at locations up to > >>32 bits of significance .." > > > >I prefer the original wording. Your suggestion says something about what > >XFS can do, but nothing about what it is not allowed to do, which is > >rather more important. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >xfs mailing list > >xfs@oss.sgi.com > >http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > > I see your point. Sounds good to me. > > --Mark. > This means no change is needed? > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs -- --Carlos _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs