On 7/9/12 1:03 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote: > On 07/09/2012 05:25 PM, Peter Robinson wrote: > >>> And it's a lot more expensive. >> >> I prefect expense over corrupted filesystems or other equally not >> nice situations. > > I prefer a well written program that doesn't require expensive bodges > to keep my data safe. What's your point? > >>> Just because there is an expensive workaround doesn't mean it's >>> not a bug. And arguably even with hardware fixup it's still a bug >>> and appallingly bad practice. >> >> I don't disagree but then the Fedora ARM SIG is not about >> development and changes of e2fsprogs and if that is what you're >> wishing to discuss here the discussion should likely be taken to >> the upstream e2fsprogs list. > > Maybe, but is that really how upstreaming works? I'm a Fedora user, > therefore I'm reporting a bug to Fedora. Is it not from there the > responsibility of the distro package maintainer to see to it that the > fix is pursued upstream? Well, I'm the maintainer & also active upstream, so I can handle it, within the confines of triage I need to do. My plate is rather full. Since you have the hardware, the passion and the knowledge, if you'd like to help upstream, that'd be great too! Thanks, -Eric _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
