On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:32:57AM +0100, David Howells wrote: > Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > NAK. There's no need to touch i_ino and a lot of reasons for not doing > > that. > > Like all those printks that write ambiguous messages because they can't report > the full inode number? I'm not so worried about those because they're for the > most part debugging messages, but still, they *can* report invalid information > because i_ino is not big enough in error and warning messages. In fs-independent code? How many of those do we actually have? - 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
