On Saturday 29 November 2008 00:06:01 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 05:03:10PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > well, i guess the first question to ask is, does it make sense to have > > these journal options in /etc/fstab ? > > No, not really. The original intent for journal=update was to update > from a V1 journal superblock to the V2 journal superblock. This > transition happened in around 2001. It was intended to be used to ask > the kernel to do a one-time conversion of the superblock version. > There's no real reason to have this in the kernel; it's the sort of > thing that is much better done in the userspace tools anyway. p > > We should probably remove it from the kernel, actually. There might > be some really ancient 2.4 systems that still have journals with V1 > superblocks, but they are few and far between. > > In any case, if this was going to be in the kernel, it makes > absolutely zero sense for it to be in /etc/fstab. It should only be > something that the user manually specifies when first mounting the > filesystem, and for that reason it's actually better done in a > userspace tool. sounds good. i like rejecting bugs ;). thanks for the summary. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
