On 5/29/18 2:12 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Meh. Do we really need these switch to octal patches to start > with? I mean, I personally prefer octal, but just switching around > in random code that isn't otherwise changed creates nothing but churn.
This is exactly why I hesitated doing it, I knew it would end up with conflicts. The main reason was to get rid of the inconsistency, since we had a fair mix of octal and symbolic names. -- Jens Axboe
