On Tue, 2006-03-28 at 14:34 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Mar 2006, Trond Myklebust wrote: > > > > The help text says that if you select CONFIG_LBD, then it will > > automatically select CONFIG_LFS. Nope... That isn't currently the > > case. > > I'm not sure your patch makes anything much better, though. > > Why does CONFIG_LSF exist in the first place? Afaik, it only affects a > totally not-very-interesting thing (blkcnt_t) for a totally not very > interesting feature (the number of people who want single files >2TB is > likely not very big). > > Having it auto-selected by LBD sounds insane, since LBD is likely more > interesting than LSF itsef is. It would make more sense to go the other > way (have LSF auto-select LBD). NFSv3 and CIFS are two examples of commonly used filesystems that don't care a hoot for CONFIG_LBD, but that still want to be able to support large values for inode->i_blocks. Cheers, Trond - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
