On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote: >> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:29 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: >>> instead of renaming& keeping the btrfsctl.c copy >> >> There is a new momentum to improve the Btrfs-progs quality :) >> >> IMO, one step is to get rid of the legacy tools and sources. It wastes >> time to maintain them and these old tools cause confusion. btrfsctl.c, >> btrfs-vol.c and btrfs-show.c are not needed anymore. Please correct me >> if there are plans to use these old tools in future Linux distributions. >> The "btrfs" tool replaces the legacy "btrfsctl", "btrfs-vol" and >> "btrfs-show" tools. Below, the usage text of the old tools is quoted. >> All these tasks are also offered in the "btrfs" tool, and this tool is >> the newer one. > > I fully agree: btrfsctl, btrfs-vol, btrfs-show are perfectly replaced by by > btrfs. Moreover time to time the patches are more complex than the needing > because exists these "legacy" programs. > > I checked the debian package, and to me seems that there is no need of > {btrfsctl,btrfs-vol,btrfs-show}
Hm, they are shipped in the Fedora package. For backwards compat, could those be turned into shell scripts which invoke the btrfs tool? -Eric > BR > Goffredo > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html