On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 04:26:33PM +0200, Jim Meyering wrote: > Heads up: > > In the next couple of days I expect to rebase all of next and pull > it onto master, and then to begin working towards a near-term beta release. > > Things we should discuss first: > > - how to handle the soon-to-be-deprecated FS-manipulation subcommands, > mkfs, mkpartfs, check, cp. > > Our options: > > * warn-and-try-anyway: I would not advise this: the FS code is > so old and bit-rotten, and I've made no attempt to adapt it > to handle the possibility of >512-byte sectors. In addition, > there are relatively few tests that exercise it. > > * simply fail, possibly suggesting to try parted-1.9.x > I favor this one.
+1 to this one. Are you talking about introducing the failure in parted cli or parted lib? and you have spoken about parted behavior but have not touched on what we are to do to the actual code. Should we keep it or simply remove all traces of it. If we are to fail, I think removing it is a worth while possibility. This will mean that the parted cli user will see a fail of the type. "mkpartfs -- unknown argument" and the project that uses parted lib will see a failure in the build when it does not find certain parts of the API. Regards. > > - determine whether it really is ok to omit support for the few > partition table types that I haven't yet adapted to work with > >512-byte sector sizes. > > Of course, there are a few bugs that have to be addressed > before the beta release. > > If you've posted a patch that doesn't apply to "next", > please consider rebasing it very soon. > > Jim > > _______________________________________________ > parted-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel -- Joel Andres Granados Brno, Czech Republic, Red Hat.
pgp7NfLbzGD6D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
