Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 May 2002 16:10:11 +0200 | From | Martin Dalecki <> | Subject | Re: Quota patches |
| |
Uz.ytkownik Jan Kara napisa?: > Hi all, > > >>On Thu, May 23, 2002 at 10:03:50AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 23 May 2002, Jan Kara wrote: >>> >>>>... . If he has newer tools >>>>(<3.05) he has to decide depending on format he wants to use... >>> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> >> >>>This makes me pretty certain we just do not want to have the backwards- >>>compatibility layer in 2.5.x >>> >>>Are there _any_ reasons to use the old stuff, if the fix is just to >>>upgrade to a newer quota tool? >> >>Moving to newer interfaces implies use of the new ondisk format >>for the quota files (exclusively) - I'd imagine that's the main >>reason behind providing a choice. Whether or not that reason is >>sufficently compelling though... dunno. If one wanted to be able >>to switch between booting either 2.4 (unpatched) and 2.5+, and >>also maintain quota information on filestystems, then the choice >>would be useful in that situation. > > Latest quota interface is able to handle both formats together > (structures passed throught Q_GETQUOTA, Q_SETQUOTA,... are independent > of quota format and Q_QUOTAON takes as an argument in 'id' the quota format > number). So if user wants to stay at old format he can... > So I think Linus is right here that there's no real reason for keeping > compatibility code in 2.5... Linus, I'll send you the patch which kicks > out the compatibility stuff.
As a side note:
If we can do it for quota - we could possible remove the IPC_OLD variant away as well. It's looong overdue by now, becouse the IPC_OLD was not standard conformant anyway.
I would be really really glad to do it iff ACK-ed.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |