From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Mar 20 16:48:59 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F002A1065670; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:48:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marius@alchemy.franken.de) Received: from alchemy.franken.de (alchemy.franken.de [194.94.249.214]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DBD88FC1E; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:48:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alchemy.franken.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alchemy.franken.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/ALCHEMY.FRANKEN.DE) with ESMTP id p2KGMDiX015370; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:22:14 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius@alchemy.franken.de) Received: (from marius@localhost) by alchemy.franken.de (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p2KGMCls015369; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:22:12 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius) Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:22:12 +0100 From: Marius Strobl To: Kirk McKusick Message-ID: <20110320162212.GI1606@alchemy.franken.de> References: <4D840BD0.4030306@freebsd.org> <201103200000.p2K00pue003373@chez.mckusick.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201103200000.p2K00pue003373@chez.mckusick.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, kvedulv@kvedulv.de, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Gavin Atkinson , Nathan Whitehorn , svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Jeff Roberson Subject: Re: svn commit: r219667 - head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall/partedit X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:49:00 -0000 On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 05:00:51PM -0700, Kirk McKusick wrote: > > Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2011 20:50:08 -0500 > > From: Nathan Whitehorn > > Subject: Re: svn commit: r219667 - head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall/partedit > > To: Gavin Atkinson > > Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, > > svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org > > > > On 03/15/11 12:50, Gavin Atkinson wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 12:26 -0500, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: > > > Hrm, I hadn't realised this was the case. If this change is intentional > > > and planned to remain, I guess the various bits of documentation that > > > say "several partitions good, one bad" should be updated... > > > > It is intended. I think it makes things somewhat easier for the > > virtualization case, and I know a lot of people have been running their > > systems with "one-big-/" for years. If it is harmful for some reason, > > however, it's easy to change. > > > > >>> I wonder if it is time to start enabling SU+J on non-root filesystems > > >>> now? > > >> That's certainly something to think about, although I'll defer whether > > >> that is wise to others. It's a little bit of a pain on the > > >> implementation side, since you can't turn it on from newfs, but that > > >> isn't a serious obstacle. > > > As of r218726, you can now set this from newfs. (-j) > > > > Ah, wonderful. The decision of whether that is a good idea still rests > > with others, however :) > > -nathan > > I believe that we should enable SU+J by default. We should do it now > so that we can get wider experience with it before 9.0 is released > (thus letting us revert to SU if uncorrectable problems arise). I fear it's still a bit premature for enable SU+J by default. Rather recently I was told about a SU+J filesystems lost after a panic that happend after snapshotting it (report CC'ed, maybe he can provide some more details) and I'm pretty sure I've seen the problem described in PR 149022 also after the potential fix mentioned in its feedback. Marius