Hi all,
the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
The most of changes are just bug fixes and speedups.
StatData got wrong values sometimes.
Tails were not converted back if had been converted to internal.
Lost+found was not accessible sometimes due to wrong flag in
metadata.
Extra checks on --check and fixes on --fix-fixable were added
for wrong st_nlinks, some info in internal tree.
Some multiple checks during overwriting and relocation were
eliminated.
Etc.
Added different block size support - 1k, 2k and for Alpha 8k.
Kernel support we are going to include into 2.4.20.
Support for bad block lists was added also but disabled for now
due to some conflicts with the current kernel, which have not been
solved yet.
Verson numbering scheme was changed.
Another pre release 3.6.3-pre1 is also available. It includes some
great speedups for reiserfsck.
--
Thanks,
Vitaly Fertman
I may be stupid, but if the latest release is 3.6.2 why is the "LATEST IS"
link still pointing to 3.x.1b? Is 3.6.2 the version which we (Gentoo
Linux) should be packaging? Is it more or less safe than 3.x.1b? Thanks!
--Brandon
On Wed, 07/10/02 at 12:06:48 +0400, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
>
> The most of changes are just bug fixes and speedups.
> StatData got wrong values sometimes.
> Tails were not converted back if had been converted to internal.
> Lost+found was not accessible sometimes due to wrong flag in
> metadata.
> Extra checks on --check and fixes on --fix-fixable were added
> for wrong st_nlinks, some info in internal tree.
> Some multiple checks during overwriting and relocation were
> eliminated.
> Etc.
>
> Added different block size support - 1k, 2k and for Alpha 8k.
> Kernel support we are going to include into 2.4.20.
>
> Support for bad block lists was added also but disabled for now
> due to some conflicts with the current kernel, which have not been
> solved yet.
>
> Verson numbering scheme was changed.
>
> Another pre release 3.6.3-pre1 is also available. It includes some
> great speedups for reiserfsck.
>
> --
>
> Thanks,
> Vitaly Fertman
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> I may be stupid, but if the latest release is 3.6.2 why is the "LATEST IS"
> link still pointing to 3.x.1b? Is 3.6.2 the version which we (Gentoo
> Linux) should be packaging? Is it more or less safe than 3.x.1b? Thanks!
Yes, it is going to be changed.
--
Thanks,
Vitaly Fertman
On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 02:06, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
>
Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
Steven
--- linux-2.4.19-rc1/Documentation/Changes.orig Wed Jul 10 08:12:24 2002
+++ linux-2.4.19-rc1/Documentation/Changes Wed Jul 10 08:13:05 2002
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@
o modutils 2.4.2 # insmod -V
o e2fsprogs 1.25 # tune2fs
o jfsutils 1.0.12 # fsck.jfs -V
-o reiserfsprogs 3.x.1b # reiserfsck 2>&1|grep reiserfsprogs
+o reiserfsprogs 3.6.2 # reiserfsck 2>&1|grep reiserfsprogs
o pcmcia-cs 3.1.21 # cardmgr -V
o PPP 2.4.0 # pppd --version
o isdn4k-utils 3.1pre1 # isdnctrl 2>&1|grep version
@@ -326,7 +326,7 @@
Reiserfsprogs
-------------
-o <ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfsprogs/reiserfsprogs-3.x.1b.tar.gz>
+o <ftp://ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiserfsprogs/reiserfsprogs-3.6.2.tar.gz>
LVM toolset
-----------
Hello!
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 08:23:54AM -0600, Steven Cole wrote:
> > the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
> Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
> -o reiserfsprogs 3.x.1b # reiserfsck 2>&1|grep reiserfsprogs
> +o reiserfsprogs 3.6.2 # reiserfsck 2>&1|grep reiserfsprogs
Not yet. We do not want to disturb Marchello with more patches now.
We will submit similar patch after 2.4.19 is out.
Bye,
Oleg
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 08:23:54AM -0600, Steven Cole wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 02:06, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
> >
>
> Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
Does reiserfs in 2.4.19-pre require that version? if yes it would be
very bad (2.4 is not supposed to need newer userlevel during the series)
On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 10:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 08:23:54AM -0600, Steven Cole wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 02:06, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
> > >
> >
> > Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
>
> Does reiserfs in 2.4.19-pre require that version? if yes it would be
> very bad (2.4 is not supposed to need newer userlevel during the series)
No, it does not require that version. It is a good idea since fsck
improves with each release though ;-)
-chris
> No, it does not require that version. It is a good idea since fsck
> improves with each release though ;-)
the list in Documentation/Changes is what's needed _at least_. It doesn't
make much sense to upgrade it all the time.
Hello!
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 03:38:01PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
> > Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
> Does reiserfs in 2.4.19-pre require that version? if yes it would be
No.
> very bad (2.4 is not supposed to need newer userlevel during the series)
Well, sometimes you want to upgrade not because it is required, but because
of bugfixed you will get out of newer version.
Bye,
Oleg
On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 08:23:54AM -0600, Steven Cole wrote:
> > On Wed, 2002-07-10 at 02:06, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > the latest reiserfsprogs-3.6.2 is available on our ftp site.
> > >
> >
> > Is the following patch to Documentation/Changes appropriate?
>
> Does reiserfs in 2.4.19-pre require that version? if yes it would be
> very bad (2.4 is not supposed to need newer userlevel during the series)
Well, there's user-space and user-space. A part of the user space is
kernel/system oriented, like fsck.* or util-linux (mount, chattr!)
configuration tools or user-space parts of drivers, and there's a part
of user-space that is unrelated.
If the kernel related stuff (which usually is in /sbin) needs to be
updated, that's fine even for a "stable" kernel. If the new
reiserfs-progs fix a problem of an older version, then by all means go
fix and update Documentation/Changes. There could be a new "recommended"
column though which lists non-critical version updates.
--
Matthias Andree
Hi all,
a critical bug was fixed in reiserfsck journal replay process,
so we decided to release a new 3.6.3 progs with just 2 bug
fixes related to it.
--
Thanks,
Vitaly Fertman
On Mon, 2002-08-12 at 11:42, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> a critical bug was fixed in reiserfsck journal replay process,
> so we decided to release a new 3.6.3 progs with just 2 bug
> fixes related to it.
What version does reiserfsck in this report. That way I can update
CHANGES to indicate the 3.6.3 bits are required.
Right now it says 3.x.1b - should it now say 3.6.3 ?
> On Mon, 2002-08-12 at 11:42, Vitaly Fertman wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > a critical bug was fixed in reiserfsck journal replay process,
> > so we decided to release a new 3.6.3 progs with just 2 bug
> > fixes related to it.
>
> What version does reiserfsck in this report. That way I can update
All utilities have the same version as the package has, so 3.6.3.
> CHANGES to indicate the 3.6.3 bits are required.
>
> Right now it says 3.x.1b - should it now say 3.6.3 ?
This bug was introduced in 3.6.2, so 3.x.1b was not affected.
But 3.x.1b contains many other bugs which were fixed in 3.6.2.
--
Thanks,
Vitaly Fertman