On Thu, May 01, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 10:40:37AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > Secondly, Christoph, was there a reason why you didn't unpublish > > ext2_fs.h when you unpublished ext3_fs.h? Are there a significant > > number of userspace prorams using it? I don't care, because e2fsprogs > > doesn't use it, and as far as I'm concerned I'd much rather encourage > > people to use ext2fs/ext2_fs.h from e2fsprogs instead. And this would > > allow us to do a similar patch for fs/ext2; but assume you had found > > some significant number of applications that would break if we > > unexported and moved linux/ext2_fs.h? > > ext2_fs.h has been there for much longer, and unlike ext3_fs.h it > actually is useable by userpsace. Of course everyone should be using > the headers from e2fsprogs by now, but I'm not sure if that's really the > case. > > In past cases like that Olaf did greps over the whole OpenSuSE tree, > so maybe he could do it for this aswell? 29 packages (out of 3123) contain the string linux/ext2_fs.h. Most of them test for either ext2fs/ext2_fs.h or linux/ext2_fs.h. The following have linux/ext2_fs.h hardcoded: pam_mktemp-1.0.3 sash-3.7 socat-1.6.0.1 arcboot-0.3.2 (for mips dvhtool) All of them can be fixed. I suggest to drop that header. Olaf -- 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
