On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:29:46AM +0200, Carlos Maiolino wrote: > Thanks for the review Brian, I'll walk over it and fix the points you mentioned. > > > > > > I still don't really get why we have separate -l and -s options here. It > > seems to me that the behavior of -l already gives us the information > > that -s does. Even if that's not obvious enough, the -l command could > > just print out both. For example: > > > > "Largest inode: 1234 (32-bit)" > > I agree with you here, but, I'll let Dave answer this question, maybe he had > some another idea for it that I'm not aware of. No preference here; all that I was suggesting was that if you want to know whether inodes are 32/64 bit it doesn't matter what the largest inode number is. i.e. "Can I mount this with inode32 and have no problems (yes/no)?" And it's a lot easier to just query for *any* 64 bit inode than it is to find the largest inode number... If you want to combine the two, then that's fine by me. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
