Re: [PATCH 05/44 take 2] [UBI] internal common header

Artem Bityutskiy
2007-02-20T15:22:46Z

On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 09:55 -0500, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > What do you mean? It is internal version just for future help: if we
> > develop incompatible UBI2 the old UBI will reject the new images.
>
> In that case it's not an *implementation* version number, but rather
> an on-disk *format* version number.

True, will refine the comment.

> There's a difference. It's also
> often not used much, since another way of dealing with the problem is
> to mark major each on-disk version with a different magic number.

The advantage of version is that UBI can distinguish between garbage and
incompatible image. If I meet wrong magic - what is it - rubbish,
corrupted header? Should I run recovery procedure? Having version is
just cleaner.

> Why isn't this being done via #define? It's not like this is any kind
> of an enumerated type, especially since it's being installed into a
> 32bit type, and not even an enum type.

Will be fixed, thanks.

--
Best regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Битюцкий Артём)