From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B83677F51 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 21:59:54 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay2.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98FDE304043 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2015 19:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Ishtar.hs.tlinx.org (ishtar.tlinx.org [173.164.175.65]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id HQutTtOBMzV5ciuV (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55C5709F.8030705@tlinx.org> Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2015 19:59:43 -0700 From: "L.A. Walsh" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: why crc req on free-inobt & file-type-indir options? References: <55C41D75.4040504@tlinx.org> <55C43B70.4050300@sandeen.net> <55C468F0.2040707@tlinx.org> <20150807225531.GG3902@dastard> <55C55265.4080309@tlinx.org> <620A4212-818A-4375-90FC-DBB0B91A84DB@sandeen.net> In-Reply-To: <620A4212-818A-4375-90FC-DBB0B91A84DB@sandeen.net> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Eric Sandeen Cc: xfs-oss Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> On Aug 7, 2015, at 5:50 PM, L.A. Walsh wrote: >> Q: should the versions of xfsdump&restore be the same as the rest of the xfsprogs? > Nope, they are separate packages with separate versioning. --- I see. So how does one tell which version of xfsdump/restore should be used to "safely" dump (and restore) a file system made with version i.j.k of xfsprogs(mkfs.xfs) ? Or is that possible? _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs