From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] xfstests: add support for ext4dev FSTYP Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2011 09:59:35 -0500 Message-ID: <4DE7A557.9040608@redhat.com> References: <1306933012-8666-1-git-send-email-amir73il@users.sourceforge.net> <20110601232804.GL32466@dastard> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Dave Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, sergey57@gmail.com, Amir Goldstein To: "Amir G." Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ext4.vger.kernel.org On 6/2/11 2:16 AM, Amir G. wrote: > OK, after upgrading to newer util-linux and building it from git, > which also didn't help, I finally found who to blame - me. > I had an old (noauto) entry in /etc/fstab which claimed that /dev/sda5 is ext4. > fsck was picking up that entry and insisting that /dev/sda5 is ext4 > (regardless of what it really is) > blkid isn't doing that silly thing. > > Amir So where are we at with all this? I don't really mind adding ext4dev to FSTYP case statements, it -is- something which blkid could, in theory, still return, and making xfstests cope with that and try to invoke fsck -t ext4dev doesn't bother me too much. It is sadly an fs type embedded into a few tools. But other than that, I don't think we should be making changes to upstream projects based on your current development hacks (I don't mean hack in a bad way, just that running sed across ext4 to create your custom filesystem for testing should not require upstream projects to change...) So I'm ok with sprinkling "ext4|ext4dev" around if necessary. Anyone else disagree? -Eric