On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
>
>This is exactly why it should be in the kernel once the developers can't
>find any more bugs. Marked as experimental, mainly, but in the kernel
>where real users can throw cobol/Java/sql bastardizations at it and
>break it.
Sure.
On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:52:12 +0300, Markus =?UNKNOWN?Q?T=F6rnqvist?= said:
> On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> >Of course, I've worked on sufficiently few big projects that I'm still
> >naive enough to believe that unit tests _can_ catch everything, if
> >they're done
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Mon, 23 May 2005 12:52:12 +0300, Markus =?UNKNOWN?Q?T=F6rnqvist?= said:
>
>
>>On Sun, May 22, 2005 at 07:22:51PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Of course, I've worked on sufficiently few big projects that I'm still
>>>naive enough to believe that unit tests
Is there or was there a plan to support running reiserfsck on a
mounted v3 filesystem (just a check, not a fix or rebuild)? I seem to
remember this being mentioned here at some point in time, but I was
unable to find it in the mailing list archive.
Thanks!
