From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net ([150.101.137.145]:44189 "EHLO ipmail06.adl6.internode.on.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965001AbeFNXpH (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Jun 2018 19:45:07 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 09:42:39 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mkfs: remove notion of config "type" Message-ID: <20180614234239.GO10363@dastard> References: <7a30c780-d69a-71d4-d0e6-a5fcefda08e6@sandeen.net> <8c2a5a07-5d47-48a1-1593-e93eb0fb883a@sandeen.net> <20180614164121.GC6825@magnolia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180614164121.GC6825@magnolia> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: "Darrick J. Wong" Cc: Eric Sandeen , linux-xfs On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 09:41:21AM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote: > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:37:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > @@ -3796,19 +3795,18 @@ _("respecification of configuration not allowed\n")); > > ret = parse_defaults_file(fd, &dft, config_file); > > if (ret) { > > fprintf(stderr, > > -_("Error parsing %s config file: %s : %s\n"), > > - default_type_str(dft.type), > > +_("Error parsing config file: %s : %s\n"), > > config_file, strerror(errno)); > > free(config_file); > > close(fd); > > exit(1); > > } > > + printf(_("Configuration file used for defaults: %s\n"), > > _("EXPERIMENTAL configuration file used for defaults: %s\n") I don't see a reason for this to be experimental - we're not screwing with on-disk formats and there's no potential for data corruption or loss, so why do we need to mark this as "don't use this because it might screw up your data"? I'd much prefer we spend the time now to get it right before before shipping it... Which then makes me ask: why don't we have a config file version identifier in the config file? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com