On 1/24/13 11:57 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote:
> On 01/24/2013 10:23 AM, Stefan Behrens wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:39:29 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>>> instead of renaming& keeping the btrfsctl.c copy
>>
>> There is a new momentum to improve the Btrfs-progs quality :)
>>
>> IMO, one step is to get rid of the legacy tools and sources. It wastes
>> time to maintain them and these old tools cause confusion. btrfsctl.c,
>> btrfs-vol.c and btrfs-show.c are not needed anymore. Please correct me
>> if there are plans to use these old tools in future Linux distributions.
>> The "btrfs" tool replaces the legacy "btrfsctl", "btrfs-vol" and
>> "btrfs-show" tools. Below, the usage text of the old tools is quoted.
>> All these tasks are also offered in the "btrfs" tool, and this tool is
>> the newer one.
>
> I fully agree: btrfsctl, btrfs-vol, btrfs-show are perfectly replaced by by btrfs. Moreover time to time the patches are more complex than the needing because exists these "legacy" programs.
>
> I checked the debian package, and to me seems that there is no need of {btrfsctl,btrfs-vol,btrfs-show}
Hm, they are shipped in the Fedora package.
For backwards compat, could those be turned into shell scripts which invoke the btrfs tool?
-Eric
> BR
> Goffredo
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
