On 05/20/2011 03:31 PM, Ian Pilcher wrote: > On 05/20/2011 01:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >> No idea. Try filing a RFE against that package >> > > Doesn't appear to have done any good in the past. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=625967 > I find I get better responses in bugzilla if I don't nuke the entire template when filing the initial bug (I realise that you only commented on this BZ and didn't file it but that's my experience nonetheless). Also, given the triviality that you point out a patch in the bug wouldn't go amiss I'm sure (fwiw e2fsprogs uses hardlinks for these files and dosfstools uses symlinks). One possible reason for the reluctance to change this however may be that the tool is not yet considered mature enough to be glued into the bigger fsck/fsck.* infrastructure - I can't speak for the btrfs folks but this seems reasonable given that btrfsck is considered experimental at the moment (and mkfs.btrfs exists..). Regards, Bryn. -- test mailing list test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
