On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 07:30:18PM -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 02:56:54AM -0500, David Turner wrote: > > b. Use Andreas's encoding, which is incompatible with pre-1970 files > > written on 64-bit systems. > > > > I don't care about currently-existing post-2038 files, because I believe > > that nobody has a valid reason to have such files. However, I do > > believe that pre-1970 files are probably important to someone. > > > > Despite this, I prefer option (b), because I think the simplicity is > > valuable, and because I hate to give up date ranges (even ones that I > > think we'll "never" need). Option (b) is not actually lossy, because we > > could correct pre-1970 files with e2fsck; under Andreas's encoding, > > their dates would be in the far future (and thus cannot be legitimate). > > > > Would a patch that does (b) be accepted? I would accompany it with a > > patch to e2fsck (which I assume would also go to the ext4 developers > > mailing list?). > > I agree, I think this is the best way to go. I'm going to drop your > earlier patch, and wait for an updated patch from you. It may miss > this merge window, but as Andreas has pointed out, we still have a few > years to get this right. :-) Just out of curiosity, did this (updated patch) ever happen? --D > > Thanks!! > > - 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 -- 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
