I believe the right solution is to set the default in the kernel, not in
mkfs, it should be possible to change lazy-sb to no-lazy-sb and only
flag when we actually want to disable it.
FS mounted with lazy-sb, should be (if unmounted cleanly) mountable by a
non-lazy-aware kernel, (and if not unmou
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Nathan Scott wrote:
> No not really, in that in 6-12 months time 99% of kernels that people
> are using will support this feature, and the problem simply wont arise
> anymore.
Basically you are saying here: let's postpone enabling this feature by
default until Lenny
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 02:28 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for the quick reply.
>
> On Thursday 28 February 2008, Nathan Scott wrote:
> > Been discussing this with the SGI guys. The problem is most likely
> > to be that current mkfs.xfs enables the "lazy superblock" accounting
> > f
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Nathan Scott wrote:
> I've mentioned to upstream that 7 months may not be enough lead time
> before mkfs enables new features by default, and they're considering
> that and may/may not undo the change in the next xfsprogs (hope they
> do, as thats probably the best bet
Thanks for the quick reply.
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Nathan Scott wrote:
> Been discussing this with the SGI guys. The problem is most likely
> to be that current mkfs.xfs enables the "lazy superblock" accounting
> feature, which was supported in kernels since 2.6.23.
Nice that's a known pr
On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 01:32 +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Thursday 28 February 2008, Frans Pop wrote:
> > After downgrading to version 2.9.4-1, a newly created partition could be
> > mounted again.
>
> 2.9.5-1 works correctly as well.
Hi all,
Been discussing this with the SGI guys. The problem i
On Thursday 28 February 2008, Frans Pop wrote:
> After downgrading to version 2.9.4-1, a newly created partition could be
> mounted again.
2.9.5-1 works correctly as well.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> forcemerge 465737 468184
Bug#465737: Can't mount XFS partition on "/"
Bug#468184: installation-reports
Forcibly Merged 465737 468184.
> reassign 465737 xfsprogs 2.9.6-1
Bug#465737: Can't mount XFS partition on "/"
forcemerge 465737 468184
reassign 465737 xfsprogs 2.9.6-1
severity 465737 grave
tags 465737 d-i
thanks
On Monday 25 February 2008, MD Dawson wrote:
> Hi, I ran into the same problem a couple of days ago and had to use
> another filesystem. I do not have the installation syslog handy at the
> momen
9 matches
Mail list logo