In 2,4, the CONFIG_QFMT_V2 short description talks about a
"VFS v0 quota format". Is this really correct, or is the patch below
that uses the "Quota format v2 support" text from 2.6 instead correct?
cu
Adrian
--- linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/fs/Config.in.old 2004-01-07 16:46:06.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/fs/Config.in 2004-01-07 16:49:29.000000000 +0100
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
comment 'File systems'
bool 'Quota support' CONFIG_QUOTA
-dep_tristate ' VFS v0 quota format support' CONFIG_QFMT_V2 $CONFIG_QUOTA
+dep_tristate ' Quota format v2 support' CONFIG_QFMT_V2 $CONFIG_QUOTA
tristate 'Kernel automounter support' CONFIG_AUTOFS_FS
tristate 'Kernel automounter version 4 support (also supports v3)' CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS
--- linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/Documentation/Configure.help.old 2004-01-07 16:50:05.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/Documentation/Configure.help 2004-01-07 16:50:37.000000000 +0100
@@ -13628,7 +13628,7 @@
<http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto>. Probably the quota
support is only useful for multi user systems. If unsure, say N.
-VFS v0 quota format support
+Quota format v2 support
CONFIG_QFMT_V2
This quota format allows using quotas with 32-bit UIDs/GIDs. If you
need this functionality say Y here. Note that you will need latest
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:59:40PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> In 2,4, the CONFIG_QFMT_V2 short description talks about a
> "VFS v0 quota format". Is this really correct, or is the patch below
> that uses the "Quota format v2 support" text from 2.6 instead correct?
I think you should ask Jan Kara instead what he prefers. This VFS v0
stuff is his invention. Personally I'm a little confused about the proper
naming, too.
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:11:10PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:59:40PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > In 2,4, the CONFIG_QFMT_V2 short description talks about a
> > "VFS v0 quota format". Is this really correct, or is the patch below
> > that uses the "Quota format v2 support" text from 2.6 instead correct?
>
> I think you should ask Jan Kara instead what he prefers. This VFS v0
> stuff is his invention. Personally I'm a little confused about the proper
> naming, too.
Jan, could you check whether the patch below is correct?
TIA
Adrian
--- linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/fs/Config.in.old 2004-01-07 16:46:06.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/fs/Config.in 2004-01-07 16:49:29.000000000 +0100
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
comment 'File systems'
bool 'Quota support' CONFIG_QUOTA
-dep_tristate ' VFS v0 quota format support' CONFIG_QFMT_V2 $CONFIG_QUOTA
+dep_tristate ' Quota format v2 support' CONFIG_QFMT_V2 $CONFIG_QUOTA
tristate 'Kernel automounter support' CONFIG_AUTOFS_FS
tristate 'Kernel automounter version 4 support (also supports v3)' CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS
--- linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/Documentation/Configure.help.old 2004-01-07 16:50:05.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.4.25-pre4-full/Documentation/Configure.help 2004-01-07 16:50:37.000000000 +0100
@@ -13628,7 +13628,7 @@
<http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto>. Probably the quota
support is only useful for multi user systems. If unsure, say N.
-VFS v0 quota format support
+Quota format v2 support
CONFIG_QFMT_V2
This quota format allows using quotas with 32-bit UIDs/GIDs. If you
need this functionality say Y here. Note that you will need latest
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:11:10PM +0000, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 04:59:40PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > In 2,4, the CONFIG_QFMT_V2 short description talks about a
> > > "VFS v0 quota format". Is this really correct, or is the patch below
> > > that uses the "Quota format v2 support" text from 2.6 instead correct?
> >
> > I think you should ask Jan Kara instead what he prefers. This VFS v0
> > stuff is his invention. Personally I'm a little confused about the proper
> > naming, too.
>
> Jan, could you check whether the patch below is correct?
I don't have a strong opinion on this but I like the current state
slightly more. I know there's a mess that VFSv0 = quota_v2. But
currently it's at least in the state that what users (admins) see is
VFSv0 and v2 appears only in the name of kernel config options and in
the identifiers in the code. Changing VFSv0 to "v2" in kernel is no
problem but quota-tools use VFSv0 too and it's also used as an
identifier of a quota format in the options of quota tools (hence
renaming is higly unpleasant for admins). So I'm not sure that renaming
config options in kernel doesn't make things even more messy.
Honza