On Thu, 2014-07-31 at 21:04 +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> On 07/31/2014 08:19 PM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 06:28:37PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
> >> Matthew what is your opinion about this, do we need to push for removal
> >> of the partition dead code which never worked for brd, or we need to push
> >> for fixing and implementing new partition support for brd?
> >
> > Fixing the code gets my vote. brd is useful for testing things ... and
> > sometimes we need to test things that involve partitions.
> >
>
> OK I'm on it, its what I'm doing today.
>
> rrr I manged to completely trash my vm by doing 'make install' of
> util-linux and after reboot it never recovered, I remember that
> mount complained about a now missing library and I forgot and rebooted,
> that was the end of that. Anyway I installed a new fc20 system wanted
> that for a long time over my old fc18
Ah, I'm already working on this as well. :) If you want you can wait for my
patches to BRD & test - they should be out this week.
I'm planning on adding get_geo() and doing dynamic minors as is done in NVMe.
- Ross
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
