Hi Ian, On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:03 PM, Ian Kumlien <po...@demius.net> wrote: > This patch includes fsck as a subcommand of btrfs, but if you rename > the binary to btrfsck (or, preferably, use a symlink) it will act like > the old btrfs command.
You can rename files in your git (there's "git mv" for that), only thing is when you generate the patch with format-patch (or "git show", "git diff" etc.) pass it the -M option to detect moves and act appropriately. Regarding your patches, I really like the idea of "btrfs fsck" but I think I'd prefer to keep the external commands as wrapper scripts instead of adding busybox-style name detection to btrfs... But then, that's just my opinion. I guess I would have a "btrfsck" that would simply contain: #! /bin/sh exec btrfs fsck "$@" Downside is that error reporting (e.g. invalid syntax, etc.) would show "btrfs fsck" instead of the command the user actually typed... Cheers, Filipe -- 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