On Tue, Nov 20, 2007 at 11:24:03AM +0100, Christian Kujau wrote: > > Note that the userspace code still needs a lot of work. > > It's for this reason that I haven't been recommending people use it for > > production systems just yet. > > Understood. But the more ppl testing your stuff the better, right? Oh, absolutely. I just don't think it's fair to encourage people to use something that might cause them to risk their data unless they are going into it with their eyes wide open. The 'pu' branch gets very minimal testing. I do run the regression test suite(*), so it's a bit more than "it builds, ship it!", but essentially almost any patch that will apply gets thrown into 'pu', and as I review patches and fix up issues, I move them to the 'next' branch, and then a little bit later to the 'master' branch. (*) With only 3-4 test failures, but at least some of them are tests that need to be fixed up, not necessarily outright bugs in the 'pu' branch. At the moment in the git tree only the 'pu' branch has extents support, and to be honest the support in e2fsprogs-interim in terms of being able to better detect and fix corrupted filesystems without crashing. (Some of the newer features like uninit groups and flexbg isn't in e2fsprogs-interim, though.) Fixing up the extents support is very high on my priority list over the next couple of weeks, but at the moment e2fsck on the 'pu' branch will correctly check an ext4 filesystem with extents that isn't too badly corrupted; a badly corrupted one will cause e2fsck to crash. It will get better, I promise you! :-) Regards, - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
