On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 04:38:15PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
Rebased on 3.18.3, fixed some minor conflicts.
* I'm a bit surprised that automake is required for the
config.{guess,sub} and install-sh files
well, it's not required, but autoconf does not provide the scripts.
You have to
On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 04:26:13PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:07:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:07:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small incremental
patches to keep things
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Karel Zak schreef op 18-12-14 14:31:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:07:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more
conventional for userspace users
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:07:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small incremental
patches to keep things
On 12/18/14 7:31 AM, Karel Zak wrote:
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 03:07:26PM +0100, David Sterba wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 01:35:14PM +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small incremental
patches to keep things review-able.
Thanks. I went through the patches and haven't found
This is first step to make btrfs-progs build system more conventional
for userspace users and developers. All is implemented by small incremental
patches to keep things review-able.
The Makefile targets and rules are no changed, things like V=1 (verbose), C=1
(sparse) static builds, etc. still
Hi,
without any explanation I can only speculate what's the purpose of this
patch. I can see it hides the basic syscalls to wrappers and prints
messages in case of an error value.
Currently, the error codes are mostly handled and the error messages are
printed as needed, we don't want to see all
You are correct, I tried to put all the error handling code in separate layer,
but if there is no need to print error for each system call then it does not
make sense to integrate this path.
One of the userspace project on
---
Makefile | 4 +-
btrfs-syscalls.c | 180 +
btrfs-syscalls.h | 55 +++
kerncompat.h | 5 +-
utils.c | 200 +++
5 files changed, 337 insertions(+), 107
Hi,
Following path implements the uniform error handling for the utils.c
in btrfs-progs.
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 2:01 PM, neo ckn...@gmail.com wrote:
---
Makefile | 4 +-
btrfs-syscalls.c | 180 +
btrfs-syscalls.h | 55
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 08:23:13PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Definetely you are right. In fact this is true also for other tools like
tar: they complaint if you remove/move/rename a file during the copy. We
can work to increase the robustness of the process, to avoid strange
behaviour
On 2013-11-29 19:07, David Sterba wrote:
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 08:23:13PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Definetely you are right. In fact this is true also for other tools like
tar: they complaint if you remove/move/rename a file during the copy. We
can work to increase the robustness of
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 06:09:00PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and
deleting of a subvolume.
Nice feature, but can we try to make the snapshot creation atomic? This
would need support from kernel of course.
I'm worried about
Hi David,
On 2013-11-28 19:31, David Sterba wrote:
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 06:09:00PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and
deleting of a subvolume.
Nice feature, but can we try to make the snapshot creation atomic? This
would
On 26/11/2013 7:44 μμ, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
On 2013-11-26 16:12, Konstantinos Skarlatos wrote:
On 25/11/2013 11:23 μμ, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi all,
nobody is interested in these new features ?
Is this ZFS-style recursive snapshotting? If yes, i am interested, and
thanks for your
On 25/11/2013 11:23 μμ, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi all,
nobody is interested in these new features ?
Is this ZFS-style recursive snapshotting? If yes, i am interested, and
thanks for your great work :)
On 2013-11-16 18:09, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi All,
the following patches
Hi all,
nobody is interested in these new features ?
On 2013-11-16 18:09, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
Hi All,
the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and
deleting of a subvolume.
To snapshot recursively you must pass the -R switch:
# btrfs subvolume create sub1
Hi All,
the following patches implement the recursively snapshotting and
deleting of a subvolume.
To snapshot recursively you must pass the -R switch:
# btrfs subvolume create sub1
Create subvolume './sub1'
# btrfs subvolume create sub1/sub2
Create subvolume 'sub1/sub2'
# btrfs subvolume
Prefix with ERROR: the error messages of mkfs
Add the ERROR prefix to the error messages of mkfs, to align it
to the btrfs main utility style.
The patch also increase the buffer size of test_dev_for_mkfs() and
test_num_disk_vs_raid() for the error message from 100 to 150
because the former
I'm using btrfs on ubuntu 13.04 with btrfs prog v0.20-rc1
This is my configuration using 2 disks in raid1 mode:
gspe@jura:/mnt$ sudo btrfs f show
Label: 'UbuntuDSK' uuid: f4a3c832-f6ab-4b1d-9eb7-f9ba7d1cba01
Total devices 2 FS bytes used 205.41GB
devid1 size 2.70TB used 214.03GB path
On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 01:57:42PM +0200, Giuseppe Fierro wrote:
I'm using btrfs on ubuntu 13.04 with btrfs prog v0.20-rc1
This is my configuration using 2 disks in raid1 mode:
gspe@jura:/mnt$ sudo btrfs f show
Label: 'UbuntuDSK' uuid: f4a3c832-f6ab-4b1d-9eb7-f9ba7d1cba01
Total devices
Fierro wrote:
I'm using btrfs on ubuntu 13.04 with btrfs prog v0.20-rc1
This is my configuration using 2 disks in raid1 mode:
gspe@jura:/mnt$ sudo btrfs f show
Label: 'UbuntuDSK' uuid: f4a3c832-f6ab-4b1d-9eb7-f9ba7d1cba01
Total devices 2 FS bytes used 205.41GB
devid1 size 2.70TB
On Sep 4, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
If I would like to show the subvolume, i get
gspe@jura:/mnt$ sudo btrfs subvolume list /
gspe@jura:/mnt$
nothing is shown!!!
Try using the -a option. It got added a while ago, and has been a
complete pain in the neck
Hello Chris,
On Sep 4, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
If I would like to show the subvolume, i get
gspe@jura:/mnt$ sudo btrfs subvolume list /
gspe@jura:/mnt$
nothing is shown!!!
Try using the -a option. It got added a while ago, and has been a
complete
On Sep 4, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Giuseppe Fierro giuse...@fierro.org wrote:
Thanks,
as I can see I misunderstood the meaning of btrfs filesystem df I
was expecting that the 'df' has been to display free space remaining.
Check the archives, this is a long running issue that no one has particularly
在 2013-9-4，下午10:10，Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com 写道：
On Sep 4, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Giuseppe Fierro giuse...@fierro.org wrote:
Thanks,
as I can see I misunderstood the meaning of btrfs filesystem df I
was expecting that the 'df' has been to display free space remaining.
Check the
On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 10:58:33AM +0800, Chen Yang wrote:
Good catch, thanks. I see that there's no special handling of the '-'
filename that usually means stdout. We may want to add this as a common
command line usage pattern.
We can touch a file name -, so I think special handling of
In cmd_send_start(), there is a check to make sure dump_fd is not a tty
before parsing command options. So if we use the option -f file,
it doesn't work for the dump_fd has not been created. So fix it.
Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang chenyang.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-send.c | 12 +++-
1
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:21:24PM +0800, Chen Yang wrote:
In cmd_send_start(), there is a check to make sure dump_fd is not a tty
before parsing command options. So if we use the option -f file,
it doesn't work for the dump_fd has not been created. So fix it.
Good catch, thanks. I see that
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 04:21:24PM +0800, Chen Yang wrote:
In cmd_send_start(), there is a check to make sure dump_fd is not a tty
before parsing command options. So if we use the option -f file,
it doesn't work for the dump_fd has not been created. So fix it.
Good catch, thanks. I see that
We use find_good_parent() to look for a suit snapshot in the clone source
snapshots as the parent, not the source subvolume of the snapshot which
is about to be sent. fix it
Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang chenyang.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
---
cmds-send.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1
On Thu, January 24, 2013 at 12:53 (+0100), Chen Yang wrote:
We use find_good_parent() to look for a suit snapshot in the clone source
snapshots as the parent, not the source subvolume of the snapshot which
is about to be sent. fix it
Signed-off-by: Cheng Yang chenyang.f...@cn.fujitsu.com
Hi all,
this is the first of 7 patches, which improve the man page of the btrfs
command.
I added some basic text fro the man page for the filesystem restriper * and
the quota/qgroup * commands. I put in CC the writer hoping that they will
care to maintain aligned the documentation with the
Removed some static buffer, and replaced by a dynamic memory allocation
in order to support bigger text.
Comments are welcome.
BR
G.Baroncelli
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
helpextract.c | 11 +++
1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff
Warn that the man/btrfs.8.in man page is auto-generated
Comments are welcome.
BR
G.Baroncelli
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
btrfs.c |5 +
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/btrfs.c b/btrfs.c
index 4235d54..d7ece5b 100644
---
This test checks that the man page cites all the btrfs commands
Comments are welcome.
BR
G.Baroncelli
Signed-off-by: Goffredo Baroncelli kreij...@inwind.it
---
test/003s.sh | 40
1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
create mode 100755
On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:22:41PM +0100, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
this is the first of 7 patches, which improve the man page of the btrfs
command.
I added some basic text fro the man page for the filesystem restriper * and
the quota/qgroup * commands. I put in CC the writer hoping that
On 06/15/2011 04:35 PM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
Hallo, Goffredo,
Du meintest am 15.06.11:
thanks to the last Hugo's email, I restart to work on the patch which
avoid to scan cdrom and floppy during a btrfs filesystem show and a
btrfs device scan. Comparing to my previous patch I modified the
Hallo, Josef,
Du meintest am 16.06.11:
Thank you - it's nice for all who don't use udev.
Who the hell doesn't use udev?
Me - p.e.
udev may be interesting for desktop users, for multimedia computers.
It's not necessary for a simple server, for a machine where the
administrator wants to
On 06/16/2011 10:45 AM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
Hallo, Josef,
Du meintest am 16.06.11:
Thank you - it's nice for all who don't use udev.
Who the hell doesn't use udev?
Me - p.e.
udev may be interesting for desktop users, for multimedia computers.
It's not necessary for a simple
Hallo, Josef,
Du meintest am 16.06.11:
Who the hell doesn't use udev?
Me - p.e.
udev may be interesting for desktop users, for multimedia
computers. It's not necessary for a simple server, for a machine
where the administrator wants to rule instead of udev.
You don't need udev to use
Hi Helmut
On 06/16/2011 05:09 PM, Helmut Hullen wrote:
Hallo, Josef,
Du meintest am 16.06.11:
Who the hell doesn't use udev?
Me - p.e.
udev may be interesting for desktop users, for multimedia
computers. It's not necessary for a simple server, for a machine
where the administrator wants
Hi all,
thanks to the last Hugo's email, I restart to work on the patch which
avoid to scan cdrom and floppy during a btrfs filesystem show and a
btrfs device scan. Comparing to my previous patch I modified the
strategy, and now the scan of the devices is based on the content of the
file
Hallo, Goffredo,
Du meintest am 15.06.11:
thanks to the last Hugo's email, I restart to work on the patch which
avoid to scan cdrom and floppy during a btrfs filesystem show and a
btrfs device scan. Comparing to my previous patch I modified the
strategy, and now the scan of the devices is
46 matches
Mail list logo
