On 6/8/11 9:04 AM, Amir G. wrote: >> And one last note, I also think that the snapshot format change in the >> > future, when we'll have snpashots with 64bit feature compatible seems >> > just wrong to me. Adding some features or changing the implementation a >> > bit is ok, but format change is different. When the code is upstream and >> > stable it is just wrong. > What can I say, I understand why it looks bad, but is 64bit code > upstream and stable? Hell no! e2fsprogs 64bit is not out yet! > There is no reason to call it 'format change'. > It's going to be a new format used only for 64bit fs, which are not > even out there yet. And when they are finally out there, they won't > have > snapshots until the new format is implemented. Well, the on-disk format for 64-bit (48-bit?) ext4 is there & fixed; it's just that there is no released userspace which can properly handle it, right? I don't anticipate ext4 format changes for >16T, or am I missing something? -Eric -- 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
