----- Ursprüngliche Mail ----- > On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 10:29:38AM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote: >> Not sure what you're even disagreeing with, as I *do* expect new filesystems to >> be held to a high standard, and to be written with the assumption that the >> on-disk data may be corrupted or malicious. We just can't expect the bar to be >> so high (e.g. no bugs) that it's never been attained by *any* filesystem even >> after years/decades of active development. If the developers were careful, the >> code generally looks robust, and they are willing to address such bugs as they >> are found, realistically that's as good as we can expect to get... > > Well, the impression I got from Richards quick look and the reply to it is > that there is very little attempt to validate the ondisk data structure > and there is absolutely no priority to do so. Which is very different > from there is a bug or two here and there. On the plus side, everything I reported got fixed within hours. Thanks, //richard
