No it's fine. I wonder how many other unmerged things are in FreeBSD. This is
exactly why I always lobby to upstream everything.
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
> On Apr 3, 2016, at 6:10 PM, Yuri Pankov wrote:
>
> Well, my thought (and I guess same for @ilovezfs) was that -ff (and that's
> exactly why
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016, at 12:36 PM, Matthew Ahrens wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel wrote:
>> Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD?
>>
>> If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered?
>
> It looks like the interface proposed h
> I have 2 concerns with -ff:
> 1. I think the right flag would be -F, which is more in keeping with the
> existing CLI (e.g. see zpool import -f / -F, and zfs receive -F)
> 2. I'm not a big fan of making zpool overwrite unknown data. Even zpool create
> / zpool add will give a specific warning if
On Sun, Apr 3, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Josh Paetzel wrote:
> Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD?
>
> If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered?
>
It looks like the interface proposed here is the same as the FreeBSD "zpool
labelclear", with the exception o
Does this mean FreeBSD's zpool labelclear is proprietary to FreeBSD?
If so I don't suppose the FreeBSD UI could be considered?
Thanks,
Josh Paetzel
> On Apr 2, 2016, at 9:15 PM, ilovezfs wrote:
>
> @yuripankov Yes! And combined with a partitioning tool you could probably
> turn it into a dd
