> I'm not suggesting a global search & replace of "long long" or anything. > However, the current mish-mash of int vs. long vs. dgrp_t for group numbers, > __u64 vs blk64_t, etc doesn't make it clear when something is intentionally > that type, or just happens to be working for now. Having separate types > for groups vs. physical blocks vs. logical blocks as we do in the kernel > will improve the quality of the code itself, I think. > > Cheers, Andreas > I have to agree with Andreas here, types in e2fsprogs are not consistent and I have encounter this several times, trying to decide which one is the best, looking for examples, and finding different uses in different parts of e2fsprogs tools. It is a mess. I think it is worth the core crunch I someone is willing to do the job. Thanks! -Lukas -- 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
