* projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 @ 2013-10-14 16:30 Eric Sandeen 2013-10-14 21:16 ` Dave Chinner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-14 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: xfs-oss, Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz The commit: f3edb66a mkfs.xfs: validate options for CRCs up front. unintentionally (?) defaulted to projid32bit=1 for all filesystems at mkfs time. Support for 32 bit project IDs has been present since kernel v2.6.37. Is everybody ok with making this change for 3.2.0? Speak now or forever hold your peace, as they say. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-14 16:30 projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-14 21:16 ` Dave Chinner 2013-10-14 21:23 ` Ben Myers 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dave Chinner @ 2013-10-14 21:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: xfs-oss On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:30:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > The commit: > > f3edb66a mkfs.xfs: validate options for CRCs up front. > > unintentionally (?) defaulted to projid32bit=1 for all filesystems > at mkfs time. It wasn't unintentional, I just forgot to document it. > Support for 32 bit project IDs has been present since kernel v2.6.37. Right, so taking the usual approach to these things, all the distro's now ship kernels that support 32 bit project IDs, so there is no reason for mkfs.xfs in a new xfsprogs release not to set it by default. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-14 21:16 ` Dave Chinner @ 2013-10-14 21:23 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-14 21:24 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Ben Myers @ 2013-10-14 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 08:16:59AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:30:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > The commit: > > > > f3edb66a mkfs.xfs: validate options for CRCs up front. > > > > unintentionally (?) defaulted to projid32bit=1 for all filesystems > > at mkfs time. > > It wasn't unintentional, I just forgot to document it. > > > Support for 32 bit project IDs has been present since kernel v2.6.37. > > Right, so taking the usual approach to these things, all the > distro's now ship kernels that support 32 bit project IDs, so there > is no reason for mkfs.xfs in a new xfsprogs release not to set it > by default. I'm not seeing much downside to turning on 32 bit project IDs by default in 3.2.0. Sounds good to me. -Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-14 21:23 ` Ben Myers @ 2013-10-14 21:24 ` Eric Sandeen 2013-10-15 19:46 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-14 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Myers; +Cc: xfs-oss On 10/14/13 4:23 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 08:16:59AM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 11:30:13AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> The commit: >>> >>> f3edb66a mkfs.xfs: validate options for CRCs up front. >>> >>> unintentionally (?) defaulted to projid32bit=1 for all filesystems >>> at mkfs time. >> >> It wasn't unintentional, I just forgot to document it. >> >>> Support for 32 bit project IDs has been present since kernel v2.6.37. >> >> Right, so taking the usual approach to these things, all the >> distro's now ship kernels that support 32 bit project IDs, so there >> is no reason for mkfs.xfs in a new xfsprogs release not to set it >> by default. > > I'm not seeing much downside to turning on 32 bit project IDs by default in > 3.2.0. Sounds good to me. > > -Ben > Ok. Default it is! Thanks guys, just wanted to make sure we were all in agreement there. -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-14 21:24 ` Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-15 19:46 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 19:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Ben Myers, xfs-oss On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:24:24PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Ok. Default it is! Thanks guys, just wanted to make sure we were > all in agreement there. Can we make sure this gets documented in doc/CHANGES? I'm also pretty sure the entry for 3.2.0-alpha1 is severly lacking, can we make sure the one for the real release is as detailed as the ones for the previous releases? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 19:46 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 21:22 ` Ben Myers 2014-01-10 14:45 ` Rich Johnston 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Ben Myers, xfs-oss On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:46:09PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:24:24PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > Ok. Default it is! Thanks guys, just wanted to make sure we were > > all in agreement there. > > Can we make sure this gets documented in doc/CHANGES? > > I'm also pretty sure the entry for 3.2.0-alpha1 is severly lacking, > can we make sure the one for the real release is as detailed as the ones > for the previous releases? Btw, I also noticed releases after 3.1.9 aren't tagged in git, any chance we could fix that? The release.sh script was supposed to take care of this automatically. Also we have tons of fixes in the xfsprogs repo that really should go out into a new 3.1.12 release: xfs_io: v8 add the lseek() SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE support xfs_db: add header to freesp -d output xfs_repair: zero out unused parts of superblocks xfs_repair: add prototype for alloc_ex_data() xfsprogs: fix Out-of-bounds access in repair/dinode.c xfsprogs: fix inode crash in xfs_repair xfsprogs: fix unint var in repair phase6 xfsprogs: fix agcnts leak in xfs_repair's scan_ags xfsprogs:free bp in xlog_find_tail() error path xfsprogs: free bp in xlog_find_zeroed() error path xfsprogs: fix buffer leak in xlog_print_find_oldest xfsprogs: avoid double-free in xfs_attr_node_addname xfsprogs/io: add readdir command mkfs.xfs: fix protofile name create block reservation logprint: fix wrapped log dump issue xfs_metadump: manpage fix regarding frozen fs mkfs: add missing noalign suboption information xfsprogs: fix make deb xfsprogs: define umode_t for build if not defined already xfs_logprint: fix continuation transactions xfs_fsr: file reads should be O_DIRECT xfs_logprint: print all AGI unlinked buckets + a few more pending on the list. I'd volunteer to prepare and test thos backports once we get the remaining patches from the list in. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 21:22 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-15 21:31 ` Christoph Hellwig 2014-01-10 14:45 ` Rich Johnston 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Ben Myers @ 2013-10-15 21:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss Hey Christoph, On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:43:42PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:46:09PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:24:24PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > Ok. Default it is! Thanks guys, just wanted to make sure we were > > > all in agreement there. > > > > Can we make sure this gets documented in doc/CHANGES? > > > > I'm also pretty sure the entry for 3.2.0-alpha1 is severly lacking, > > can we make sure the one for the real release is as detailed as the ones > > for the previous releases? > > Btw, I also noticed releases after 3.1.9 aren't tagged in git, any > chance we could fix that? The release.sh script was supposed to take > care of this automatically. The tags are out there: http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags The release script doesn't push tags, just reminds you to do so. ;) IMO it's probably a good idea not automate pushing tags, so you have opportunity to hit the breaks and double check your work before posting a tag publicly. > Also we have tons of fixes in the xfsprogs repo that really should go > out into a new 3.1.12 release: > > xfs_io: v8 add the lseek() SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE support > xfs_db: add header to freesp -d output > xfs_repair: zero out unused parts of superblocks > xfs_repair: add prototype for alloc_ex_data() > xfsprogs: fix Out-of-bounds access in repair/dinode.c > xfsprogs: fix inode crash in xfs_repair > xfsprogs: fix unint var in repair phase6 > xfsprogs: fix agcnts leak in xfs_repair's scan_ags > xfsprogs:free bp in xlog_find_tail() error path > xfsprogs: free bp in xlog_find_zeroed() error path > xfsprogs: fix buffer leak in xlog_print_find_oldest > xfsprogs: avoid double-free in xfs_attr_node_addname > xfsprogs/io: add readdir command > mkfs.xfs: fix protofile name create block reservation > logprint: fix wrapped log dump issue > xfs_metadump: manpage fix regarding frozen fs > mkfs: add missing noalign suboption information > xfsprogs: fix make deb > xfsprogs: define umode_t for build if not defined already > xfs_logprint: fix continuation transactions > xfs_fsr: file reads should be O_DIRECT > xfs_logprint: print all AGI unlinked buckets > > + a few more pending on the list. I'd volunteer to prepare and test > thos backports once we get the remaining patches from the list in. That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. Regards, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 21:22 ` Ben Myers @ 2013-10-15 21:31 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 21:49 ` Ben Myers 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 21:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Myers; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > The tags are out there: > http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! > That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No > particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the > v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 21:31 ` Christoph Hellwig @ 2013-10-15 21:49 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-15 21:57 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Ben Myers @ 2013-10-15 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss Hey, On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:31:10PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > > The tags are out there: > > http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags > > I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! np > > That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No > > particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the > > v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. > > With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: > > hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 > Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' Yep. If folks want a 3.1.12 we should certainly kick the idea around a bit. I'm just guessing that most would prefer to focus on a 3.2.0 in the near term. Maybe I'm mistaken about that though. ;) Thanks, Ben _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 21:49 ` Ben Myers @ 2013-10-15 21:57 ` Eric Sandeen 2013-10-15 22:48 ` Dave Chinner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-15 21:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Myers; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, xfs-oss On 10/15/13 4:49 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > Hey, > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:31:10PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>> The tags are out there: >>> http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags >> >> I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! > > np > >>> That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No >>> particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the >>> v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. >> >> With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: >> >> hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 >> Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' > > Yep. If folks want a 3.1.12 we should certainly kick the idea around a bit. > I'm just guessing that most would prefer to focus on a 3.2.0 in the near term. > Maybe I'm mistaken about that though. ;) I'm not super keen to divide the focus; I've already updated the distros I care about to 3.2.0-alpha1, so I wouldn't go backwards to a 3.1.12. hch, do you have a specific need for it? -Eric > Thanks, > Ben > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 21:57 ` Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-15 22:48 ` Dave Chinner 2013-10-15 22:59 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Dave Chinner @ 2013-10-15 22:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Ben Myers, xfs-oss On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:57:36PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > On 10/15/13 4:49 PM, Ben Myers wrote: > > Hey, > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:31:10PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: > >>> The tags are out there: > >>> http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags > >> > >> I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! > > > > np > > > >>> That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No > >>> particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the > >>> v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. > >> > >> With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: > >> > >> hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 > >> Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' > > > > Yep. If folks want a 3.1.12 we should certainly kick the idea around a bit. > > I'm just guessing that most would prefer to focus on a 3.2.0 in the near term. > > Maybe I'm mistaken about that though. ;) > > I'm not super keen to divide the focus; I've already updated the distros I > care about to 3.2.0-alpha1, so I wouldn't go backwards to a 3.1.12. I'd prefer we focus on getting stuff reviewed and integrated into 3.2.0 more quickly than we are now. At this point in the cycle, we really need the 3.2 branch and xfstests to be updated daily with the changes that were reviewed in the past 24 hours so that we can iterate test cycles with the latest fixes more easily. This will give us a clearer idea of the problems we still need to fix before the release can progress without everyone having to keep their own private trees up to date with what everyone else is changing/fixing... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 22:48 ` Dave Chinner @ 2013-10-15 22:59 ` Eric Sandeen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Eric Sandeen @ 2013-10-15 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Dave Chinner; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Ben Myers, xfs-oss On 10/15/13 5:48 PM, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:57:36PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >> On 10/15/13 4:49 PM, Ben Myers wrote: >>> Hey, >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 02:31:10PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 04:22:14PM -0500, Ben Myers wrote: >>>>> The tags are out there: >>>>> http://oss.sgi.com/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=xfs/cmds/xfsprogs.git;a=tags >>>> >>>> I managed to somehow miss them. Sorry! >>> >>> np >>> >>>>> That's an interesting idea. We hadn't discussed a 3.1.12 release. No >>>>> particular objection to doing that, it's just that we didn't branch for the >>>>> v3.0.5->v3.1.0 set of releases. Maybe it is better if we all focus on 3.2.0. >>>> >>>> With git you can easily branch from a past commit, e.g.: >>>> >>>> hch@brick:~/work/xfsprogs$ git checkout -b release-3.1 v3.1.11 >>>> Switched to a new branch 'release-3.1' >>> >>> Yep. If folks want a 3.1.12 we should certainly kick the idea around a bit. >>> I'm just guessing that most would prefer to focus on a 3.2.0 in the near term. >>> Maybe I'm mistaken about that though. ;) >> >> I'm not super keen to divide the focus; I've already updated the distros I >> care about to 3.2.0-alpha1, so I wouldn't go backwards to a 3.1.12. > > I'd prefer we focus on getting stuff reviewed and integrated into > 3.2.0 more quickly than we are now. At this point in the cycle, we > really need the 3.2 branch and xfstests to be updated daily with the > changes that were reviewed in the past 24 hours so that we can > iterate test cycles with the latest fixes more easily. Agreed, I'm sitting on things that I don't know if I need to resend or not. I've offered it before, and I'll offer again: if it's a burden for SGI to keep up with xfstests merging, we can help - but the delays are getting to be problematic again in the current process. Thanks, -Eric > This will give us a clearer idea of the problems we still need to > fix before the release can progress without everyone having to keep > their own private trees up to date with what everyone else is > changing/fixing... > > Cheers, > > Dave. > _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2013-10-15 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 21:22 ` Ben Myers @ 2014-01-10 14:45 ` Rich Johnston 2014-01-11 10:30 ` Christoph Hellwig 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Rich Johnston @ 2014-01-10 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Hellwig, Eric Sandeen; +Cc: Ben Myers, xfs-oss On 10/15/2013 03:43 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 12:46:09PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 04:24:24PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> Ok. Default it is! Thanks guys, just wanted to make sure we were >>> all in agreement there. >> >> Can we make sure this gets documented in doc/CHANGES? >> >> I'm also pretty sure the entry for 3.2.0-alpha1 is severly lacking, >> can we make sure the one for the real release is as detailed as the ones >> for the previous releases? > > Btw, I also noticed releases after 3.1.9 aren't tagged in git, any > chance we could fix that? The release.sh script was supposed to take > care of this automatically. > > Also we have tons of fixes in the xfsprogs repo that really should go > out into a new 3.1.12 release: > > xfs_io: v8 add the lseek() SEEK_DATA/SEEK_HOLE support > xfs_db: add header to freesp -d output > xfs_repair: zero out unused parts of superblocks > xfs_repair: add prototype for alloc_ex_data() > xfsprogs: fix Out-of-bounds access in repair/dinode.c > xfsprogs: fix inode crash in xfs_repair > xfsprogs: fix unint var in repair phase6 > xfsprogs: fix agcnts leak in xfs_repair's scan_ags > xfsprogs:free bp in xlog_find_tail() error path > xfsprogs: free bp in xlog_find_zeroed() error path > xfsprogs: fix buffer leak in xlog_print_find_oldest > xfsprogs: avoid double-free in xfs_attr_node_addname > xfsprogs/io: add readdir command > mkfs.xfs: fix protofile name create block reservation > logprint: fix wrapped log dump issue > xfs_metadump: manpage fix regarding frozen fs > mkfs: add missing noalign suboption information > xfsprogs: fix make deb > xfsprogs: define umode_t for build if not defined already > xfs_logprint: fix continuation transactions > xfs_fsr: file reads should be O_DIRECT > xfs_logprint: print all AGI unlinked buckets > > + a few more pending on the list. I'd volunteer to prepare and test > thos backports once we get the remaining patches from the list in. > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs > Hey Christoph, If your still interested in a 3.1.12 release, a 'for-3.1.12' branch has been created. http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-01/msg00056.html Thanks --Rich _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 2014-01-10 14:45 ` Rich Johnston @ 2014-01-11 10:30 ` Christoph Hellwig 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2014-01-11 10:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rich Johnston; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, Ben Myers, Eric Sandeen, xfs-oss On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 08:45:58AM -0600, Rich Johnston wrote: > If your still interested in a 3.1.12 release, a 'for-3.1.12' branch > has been created. > http://oss.sgi.com/archives/xfs/2014-01/msg00056.html I still think we need it, but I'm not having a lot of time at the moment. I should be able to put something together in the next couple days, but I will need some help on the QA side. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-01-11 10:30 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-10-14 16:30 projid32bit=1 default in xfsprogs-3.2.0 Eric Sandeen 2013-10-14 21:16 ` Dave Chinner 2013-10-14 21:23 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-14 21:24 ` Eric Sandeen 2013-10-15 19:46 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 20:43 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 21:22 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-15 21:31 ` Christoph Hellwig 2013-10-15 21:49 ` Ben Myers 2013-10-15 21:57 ` Eric Sandeen 2013-10-15 22:48 ` Dave Chinner 2013-10-15 22:59 ` Eric Sandeen 2014-01-10 14:45 ` Rich Johnston 2014-01-11 10:30 ` Christoph Hellwig
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox