From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 644997F5D for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:17:13 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0CD1AC009 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 08:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 4ASogiD9tCa0z1Nr (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 08:17:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55843276.5020804@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:17:10 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mkfs.xfs: always use underlying fs sector size when mkfs'ing a file References: <55820229.1010701@redhat.com> <14667996.16447259.1434625419793.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <20150619150904.GB22842@infradead.org> In-Reply-To: <20150619150904.GB22842@infradead.org> 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 Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Christoph Hellwig , Jan Tulak Cc: xfs-oss On 6/19/15 10:09 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 07:03:39AM -0400, Jan Tulak wrote: >> This changes get_topology only for ENABLE_BLKID branch of #ifdef. Is that intentional, i.e. we don't expect anyone not using ENABLE_BLKID? Because otherwise, if mkfs is compiled without ENABLE_BLKID, then all we get is: > > I'm in favor of killing the !ENABLE_BLKID entirely. The proper > support in blkid has been around long enough to require it. > though we also claim to nominally support building on osx, irix, etc, which doesn't have that library, right? -Eric _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs