Re: [PATCH] config: Fix CONFIG_LFS option

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux