Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-386 Version: 2.6.12-5 Severity: minor Tag: patch sid Please include the following config snippet on all archs: CONFIG_REISERFS_PROC_INFO=y CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_XATTR=y CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_POSIX_ACL=y CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_SECURITY=y (at least the last three lines). It makes no sense to have ACL support for JFS and ext2/ext3 (and XFS, of course) but not ReiserFS... Especially since the options in question are included in powerpc, ia64, hppa and sparc architectures - please turn them on everywhere! -- David A. Madore ([EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.madore.org/~david/ ) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
tag 324202 +patch thanks On Sat, Aug 20, 2005 at 11:40:59PM +0200, David Madore wrote: > Package: linux-image-2.6.12-1-386 > Version: 2.6.12-5 > Severity: minor > Tag: patch sid > > Please include the following config snippet on all archs: > > CONFIG_REISERFS_PROC_INFO=y > CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_XATTR=y > CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_POSIX_ACL=y > CONFIG_REISERFS_FS_SECURITY=y > > (at least the last three lines). It makes no sense to have ACL > support for JFS and ext2/ext3 (and XFS, of course) but not ReiserFS... > Especially since the options in question are included in powerpc, > ia64, hppa and sparc architectures - please turn them on everywhere! [ If I posted here before, ignore that post, mail is confusing today ] Appart from my general feeling that no one should use Reiser FS, this seems perfectly reasonable. I have used split-config to generate updated configs and attached the patches. Hopefully the other kernel team people don't object to this, in which case I'll put it in the tree. default.patch This is basically what happens if you run split-config and then exit menuconfig without making any changes. In a nutshell, cleaning up inconsistencies in the configs. reiser.patch This is the result of turning the options above on in the 386 flavour of i386 and then asking for them to be applied globally. This seems to have worked, noting that arm, powerpc/noconfig.apus and s390 don't have CONFIG_REISERFS_FS enabled at all. This seems reasonable, except fhr the s390 bit, I'm not sure about that. Also I noticed that there seems to be a lot off room for unifing the fs config across all arches and flavours. I'm happy to make this happen if there are no objections. Oh, and my patches are against branches/dist/sid/kernel/linux-2.6/ Waldi seems to have been rearanging SVN again. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
Here are the patches that I forgot to attatch to my previous post. -- Horms diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/alpha/config a/debian/arch/alpha/config --- a/debian/arch/alpha/config 2005-08-30 11:45:58.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/alpha/config 2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -267,7 +267,6 @@ CONFIG_CHR_DEV_OSST=m CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=m CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR=y -CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SCH=m CONFIG_SCSI_MULTI_LUN=y CONFIG_SCSI_CONSTANTS=y CONFIG_SCSI_LOGGING=y @@ -298,7 +297,6 @@ CONFIG_MEGARAID_NEWGEN=y CONFIG_MEGARAID_MM=m CONFIG_MEGARAID_MAILBOX=m -CONFIG_MEGARAID_LEGACY=m CONFIG_SCSI_SATA=y CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_AHCI=m CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SVW=m @@ -1611,7 +1609,6 @@ CONFIG_USB_SERIAL_OPTION=m CONFIG_USB_SERIAL_OMNINET=m CONFIG_USB_EZUSB=y -# CONFIG_USB_EMI26 is not set CONFIG_USB_AUERSWALD=m CONFIG_USB_RIO500=m CONFIG_USB_LEGOTOWER=m @@ -1695,9 +1692,6 @@ CONFIG_ADFS_FS=m # CONFIG_ADFS_FS_RW is not set CONFIG_AFFS_FS=m -CONFIG_ASFS_FS=m -CONFIG_ASFS_DEFAULT_CODEPAGE="" -# CONFIG_ASFS_RW is not set CONFIG_HFS_FS=m CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS=m CONFIG_BEFS_FS=m diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/amd64/config a/debian/arch/amd64/config --- a/debian/arch/amd64/config 2005-08-30 11:45:59.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/amd64/config 2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -313,7 +313,6 @@ CONFIG_CHR_DEV_OSST=m CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=m # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR is not set -CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SCH=m CONFIG_SCSI_MULTI_LUN=y CONFIG_SCSI_CONSTANTS=y CONFIG_SCSI_LOGGING=y @@ -339,7 +338,6 @@ CONFIG_MEGARAID_NEWGEN=y CONFIG_MEGARAID_MM=m CONFIG_MEGARAID_MAILBOX=m -CONFIG_MEGARAID_LEGACY=m CONFIG_SCSI_SATA=y CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_AHCI=m CONFIG_SCSI_SATA_SVW=m @@ -1251,7 +1249,6 @@ # CONFIG_FB_ASILIANT is not set # CONFIG_FB_IMSTT is not set CONFIG_FB_VGA16=m -CONFIG_FB_VESA=m CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y CONFIG_FB_HGA=m # CONFIG_FB_HGA_ACCEL is not set @@ -1625,9 +1622,6 @@ CONFIG_ADFS_FS=m # CONFIG_ADFS_FS_RW is not set CONFIG_AFFS_FS=m -CONFIG_ASFS_FS=m -CONFIG_ASFS_DEFAULT_CODEPAGE="" -# CONFIG_ASFS_RW is not set CONFIG_HFS_FS=m CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS=m CONFIG_BEFS_FS=m diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/arm/config.footbridge a/debian/arch/arm/config.footbridge --- a/debian/arch/arm/config.footbridge 2005-08-30 11:45:58.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/arm/config.footbridge 2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -1120,7 +1120,6 @@ CONFIG_ADFS_FS=m # CONFIG_ADFS_FS_RW is not set # CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set -# CONFIG_ASFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS is not set # CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/arm/config.ixp4xx a/debian/arch/arm/config.ixp4xx --- a/debian/arch/arm/config.ixp4xx 2005-08-30 11:45:58.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/arm/config.ixp4xx 2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -1052,7 +1052,6 @@ # # CONFIG_ADFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set -# CONFIG_ASFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS is not set # CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/arm/config.rpc a/debian/arch/arm/config.rpc --- a/debian/arch/arm/config.rpc2005-08-30 11:45:58.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/arm/config.rpc2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -266,7 +266,6 @@ CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=y CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR=y CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SG=y -# CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SCH is not set # # Some SCSI devices (e.g. CD jukebox) support multiple LUNs @@ -795,7 +794,6 @@ CONFIG_ADFS_FS=y # CONFIG_ADFS_FS_RW is not set # CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set -# CONFIG_ASFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS is not set # CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/config a/debian/arch/config --- a/debian/arch/config2005-08-30 11:45:59.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/config2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -178,3 +178,6 @@ CONFIG_TCG_NSC=m # CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED is not set CONFIG_6PACK=m +CONFIG_SCSI_QLA2XXX=m +# CONFIG_USB_EMI26 is not set +# CONFIG_FB_VESA is not set diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/hppa/config a/debian/arch/hppa/config --- a/debian/arch/hppa/config 2005-08-30 11:45:59.0 +0900 +++ a/debian/arch/hppa/config 2005-08-30 13:02:05.0 +0900 @@ -275,7 +275,6 @@ CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR=m # CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SR_VENDOR is not set CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SG=m -CONFIG_CHR_DEV_SCH=m # # Some SCSI devices (e.g. CD jukebox) support multiple LUNs @@ -308,7 +307,6 @@ # CONFIG_SCSI_DPT_I2O is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_IN2000 is not set # CONFIG_MEGARAID_NEWGEN is not set -CONFIG_MEGARAID_LEGACY=m # CONFIG_SCSI_SATA is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_BUSLOGIC is not set # CONFIG_SCSI_DMX3191D is not set @@ -1434,7 +1432,6 @@ # # CONFIG_ADFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_AFFS_FS is not set -# CONFIG_ASFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFS_FS is not set # CONFIG_HFSPLUS_FS is not set # CONFIG_BEFS_FS is not set diff --exclude .svn -ruN a/debian/arch/hppa/config.parisc a/debian/arch/hppa/config
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:39:27PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 06:47:41PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > I am also still wondering if there is any interest in > > consolodating the entirel fs configuration, which seems > > a bit of a mess right now - e.g. compare the EXT2/3 options > > for different arches and flavours. > > Yes it is. > > You can try to use split-config, but you have to check each option > against the dependencies and be very carefully. > > Too make our lives a little bit easier, I currently think about a > kconfig like tool which can read more than on config file and aggregate > changes in such splitted config. I agree that the current split-config is somehat limited with regards to this task. What do you have in mind for a new tool? -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 05:58:35PM +0900, Horms wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 10:24:48AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:51:53PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > Here are the patches that I forgot to attatch to my previous post. > > > > You removed the ASFS entries. Did you used non-debian sources? > > Perhaps there were some patches missing. > I was working with source tree from > linux-2.6 2.6.12-5 as follows. > > apt-get source linux-2.6 > cd linux-2.6 > rsync -av $SVN/branches/dists/sid/kernel/linux-2.6/debian/ debian/ --exclude > .svn > $SVN/trunk/scripts/split-config > > diff --exclude .svn -ru $SVN/branches/dists/sid/kernel/linux-2.6/debian/ > debian/ > > How can I make sure all the patches from svn have been applied? > I don't think debian/rules apply works the way that it used to. Ok, I worked out that I need to run the following to get the patches, override_version=2.6.12-6 sh ./debian/bin/apply After I do so I don't get any discrepancies, so the default.patch I posted is bogus, please ignore it. I have attached a replacement reiserfs.patch for consideration. I am also still wondering if there is any interest in consolodating the entirel fs configuration, which seems a bit of a mess right now - e.g. compare the EXT2/3 options for different arches and flavours. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 01:20:37PM +0900, Horms wrote: > Appart from my general feeling that no one should use Reiser FS, Why is that? I mean, certainly every filesystem has its problems, but I don't think there's a consensus that ReiserFS is much worse than the others? I personally find it useful because it doesn't have any limitation on the number of inodes. -- David A. Madore ([EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.madore.org/~david/ ) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
David Madore wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 01:20:37PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > Appart from my general feeling that no one should use Reiser FS, > > Why is that? I mean, certainly every filesystem has its problems, but > I don't think there's a consensus that ReiserFS is much worse than the > others? I personally find it useful because it doesn't have any > limitation on the number of inodes. Exactly those dynamic on-disk structures make it hard to do useful recovery in case of unexpected (e.g. hardware-) errors. More conservatively designed filesystems have better chances to keep the damage to a minimum. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 06:29:02PM +0200, David Madore wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 01:20:37PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > Appart from my general feeling that no one should use Reiser FS, > > Why is that? I mean, certainly every filesystem has its problems, but > I don't think there's a consensus that ReiserFS is much worse than the > others? I personally find it useful because it doesn't have any > limitation on the number of inodes. After hearing Ted T'so talk about how Reiser's fsck works, basically searching for things that look like blocks and joining them up, I felt a bit uncomfortable - what if you have an image of a riserfs on a reiserfs partition? I've herad some other unplesant things too, though I can't remember any of them off hand. So I don't recommend that people use Reiser FS, though I do know a lot of work has gone into it, and a lot of people find it quite useful, and thats fine too. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On 08/30/05 06:29:02PM +0200, David Madore wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 01:20:37PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > Appart from my general feeling that no one should use Reiser FS, > > Why is that? I mean, certainly every filesystem has its problems, but > I don't think there's a consensus that ReiserFS is much worse than the > others? I personally find it useful because it doesn't have any > limitation on the number of inodes. Every encounter I've had with reiserfs has ended in frustration, it's just not worth fighting with it when there are other filesystems that are much more reliable with much better userland tools like XFS. Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
#include * Jim Crilly [Thu, Sep 01 2005, 07:02:26PM]: > > Why is that? I mean, certainly every filesystem has its problems, but > > I don't think there's a consensus that ReiserFS is much worse than the > > others? I personally find it useful because it doesn't have any > > limitation on the number of inodes. > > Every encounter I've had with reiserfs has ended in frustration, it's just > not worth fighting with it when there are other filesystems that are much > more reliable with much better userland tools like XFS. First: this discussion is pointless and always ends in people promoting their favorite toy (only). So how do you know they are reliable? For me, XFS began eating my files after 1.5years of usage, and the tools did not detect any errer leading to systematic damages. Regards, Eduard. -- Ambassador Londo Mollari: Do you know what the last Xon said just before he died? [Clutches heart] Ambassador Londo Mollari: RGHHH! -- Quotes from Babylon 5 -- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 09:45:18AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: [...] > > First: this discussion is pointless and always ends in people promoting > their favorite toy (only). Pretty much. > > So how do you know they are reliable? For me, XFS began eating my files > after 1.5years of usage, and the tools did not detect any errer leading > to systematic damages. I've heard horror stories w/ both reiser and XFS. I have heard good things of JFS. And, of course, ext3 continues to be incredibly reliable (albeit not overly-quick, but..). I wouldn't use any other filesystem except for network-cache-like things that need speed but not reliability. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On 09/02/05 09:45:18AM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > First: this discussion is pointless and always ends in people promoting > their favorite toy (only). > True, but since most people don't have enough time or resources to do exhaustive testing of every possible option, anecdotal evidence from other people's experiences are all they have upon which to base their decision. > So how do you know they are reliable? For me, XFS began eating my files > after 1.5years of usage, and the tools did not detect any errer leading > to systematic damages. > Obviously I can't predict what will happen a year from now, but what I can say is that XFS has been a lot more reliable for me and that the userland tools are a lot more affective and complete than those provided by the reiser people. When Reiser3 began acting up for me reiserfsck and mounting the filesystem both said it was in good shape, but as soon as I touched a certain file the screen would go blank and the box would reboot, I had to hook up a serial console to even see that Reiser3 was the problem. And on top of it all, XFS is actually maintained. Reiser3 was pretty much dropped on the floor once Namesys started working on Reiser4. Reiser3 hasn't been touched by anyone from Namesys in years leaving SuSe to do pretty much all of the maintenance. > Regards, > Eduard. > -- Jim. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
Can we please stop this my filesystem is better than yours crap? As far as the debian kernel packages are concerned we should support all filesystems supported upstream unless there's a very good reason. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:51:53PM +0900, Horms wrote: > Here are the patches that I forgot to attatch to my previous post. You removed the ASFS entries. Did you used non-debian sources? Bastian -- Those who hate and fight must stop themselves -- otherwise it is not stopped. -- Spock, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 10:24:48AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 04:51:53PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > Here are the patches that I forgot to attatch to my previous post. > > You removed the ASFS entries. Did you used non-debian sources? Perhaps there were some patches missing. I was working with source tree from linux-2.6 2.6.12-5 as follows. apt-get source linux-2.6 cd linux-2.6 rsync -av $SVN/branches/dists/sid/kernel/linux-2.6/debian/ debian/ --exclude .svn $SVN/trunk/scripts/split-config diff --exclude .svn -ru $SVN/branches/dists/sid/kernel/linux-2.6/debian/ debian/ How can I make sure all the patches from svn have been applied? I don't think debian/rules apply works the way that it used to. -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 06:47:41PM +0900, Horms wrote: > I am also still wondering if there is any interest in > consolodating the entirel fs configuration, which seems > a bit of a mess right now - e.g. compare the EXT2/3 options > for different arches and flavours. Yes it is. You can try to use split-config, but you have to check each option against the dependencies and be very carefully. Too make our lives a little bit easier, I currently think about a kconfig like tool which can read more than on config file and aggregate changes in such splitted config. Bastian -- Dammit Jim, I'm an actor, not a doctor. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Processed: Re: Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > tag 324202 +patch Bug#324202: include ReiserFS ACL support in 2.6.12 kernel There were no tags set. Tags added: patch > thanks Stopping processing here. Please contact me if you need assistance. Debian bug tracking system administrator (administrator, Debian Bugs database) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
