Hi release team, What do you guys think of this ? It looks low-risk to attempt upgrading to 1.23 - maybe less risky than just taking the pieces of interest - but hopfully bitkeeper should lower that risk anyway.
On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 01:11:21PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Tue, Aug 28, 2001 at 12:12:37PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Hi David, > > > > We've frozen the base system, as outlined in: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2001/debian-devel-announce-200108/msg00011.html > > > > That means 1.23 can't go in, as it introduces many new features, and > > thus lacks testing. > > Grumble. 1.23 was released on August 15th, and had I known that the > base freeze was coming up on the 20th, I would have pushed you hard to > get 1.23 into Woody. I was away at the time... > This is especially true since one of the more > important improvements in 1.23 is the support for raw e2image files; > this makes it much easier for folks who are reporting e2fsck bugs to > be able to submit a meta-data only version of the filesystem for > debugging purposes. > > The only other "risky" new features are the support for extended > attributes and for external journals in e2fsck, but those are code > paths which aren't even used if the filesystems don't have those > features. So it would be very trivial to take 1.23 and disable > support if you really think that would be a problem. > > > However it fixes a number of Debian-reported bugs, and I'll have a > > look at backporting those simple enough to be integrated. Maybe > > memory leaks as well if the fixes are localized enough. > > The fixes can be very easily localized; you can get the specific > changes by viewing the source tree using bitkeeper: > > bk://thunk.org:5000 Cool. I have beta of bk 2.0 installed, I'll update it. > If you're not willing to take 1.23 at this time, the following changes > really ought to be merged in. (You can either get the patches from > the BitKeeper tree, or I can mail them to you individually.) I really > would strongly urge you to try find some way of moving to 1.23, > though, since I'm not all that enthusiastic about supporting a 1.22 > "midway" codebase... > > - Ted > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-07-10 14:27:58-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Speed up journal recovery in userspace by avoiding a pointless > unconditional ext2_flush() call. Also made ext2_flush() more > efficient when the superblock is modified after the filesystem has > been flushed, and make it clear the superblock dirty flag > after doing the superblock/block group descriptor flush. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-07-20 14:13:49-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > unix.c (main): Add an explicit warning when the filesystem is left not > completely fixed when e2fsck exits. (Addresses Debian bug #104502.) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-07-20 14:25:23-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > fsck.8.in: Add much more explicit language documenting how the > fs_passno field in /etc/fstab is handled. (Addresses > Debian bug #30833). > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-07-26 09:02:56-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > pass1.c (e2fsck_pass1): Free ctx->block_ea_map at the end of pass 1. > This avoids increasing the memory footprint of e2fsck by 10%! > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-09 05:41:29-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Add support for raw image files in e2image. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-09 06:04:32-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Add support for specifiying - as the image file (to send the image > file to standard out). > > Save the journal inode if it is internal to the raw image file. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-10 19:13:11-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > mke2fs.8.in: Slim down text describing the -O flag to remove > text that erroneously implied that all features > (including compatible flags) aren't compatible with older kernels. > (This addresses some debian bug if I recall correctly, but I > didn't remember to include the bug # in the message.) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-13 10:58:41-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > super.c (release_orphan_inodes): If the filesystem contains > errors, don't run the orphan * list, since the orphan list > can't be trusted. > (Note this is critically importtant to avoid even worse filesystem > corruption problems when you're using ext3 and the kernel > finds that the filesystem contains inconsistencies.) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-15 18:39:51-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > fsck.c (check_all): Don't bother to interpret a device where the > pass number is zero. (Addresses Debian bug #106696). > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-15 19:04:59-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > fsck.c (main): Print a warning message if there are no devices to > be checked. (Addresses Debian bug #107458.) > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-15 19:06:55-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > fsck.8.in: Fixed error in synopsis of the man page. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED], 2001-08-15 19:17:37-04:00, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * tune2fs.c: Make sure that error messages are sent to stderr, and > normal messages are sent to stdout. (Addresses Debian bug > #108555.) > > > -- Yann Dirson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Why make M$-Bill richer & richer ? Debian-related: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Support Debian GNU/Linux: Pro: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Freedom, Power, Stability, Gratuity http://ydirson.free.fr/ | Check <http://www.debian.org/>
