On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 08:39:52AM +0900, Tsutomu Itoh wrote:
> >This means that it is now required to change all occurrences of
> >"mkfs.btrfs" to "mkfs.btrfs -f" everywhere. Can't we first establish a
>
> I also think so.
> It means -f is not significant to me, I think.
> (Most of my test scripts fails without -f. So I'll always type "mkfs.btrfs -f")
>
> Therefore I want you to revert commit:2a2d8e1962e8b6cda7b0a7584f6d2fb95d442cb6.
> btrfs-progs: require mkfs -f force option to overwrite filesystem or partition table
I personally don't want to see it reverted, but also very much understand the
pain to tweak all existing test scripts that rely on direct success of plain
mkfs. To resolve this I'm going to use the attached script, that intsalls
itself in place of mkfs.btrfs and act's as we were used to. This is intended to
help developers and is not for the end user.
david
first use: mkfs.btrfs.wrapper install
---
$ cat mkfs.btrfs.wrapper
#!/bin/sh
if [ $# = 1 -a $1 = 'install' ]; then
echo "Install mode"
mkfs=`type -p mkfs.btrfs`
if [ $? != 0 ]; then
echo "Cannot find mkfs.btrfs"
exit 1
fi
if file $mkfs | grep -q 'ELF .* executable'; then
echo "Moving original mkfs to ${mkfs}.real"
mv $mkfs ${mkfs}.real
echo "Copying myself to $mkfs"
cp $0 $mkfs
chmod 755 $mkfs
echo "Have a nice day"
exit 0
else
echo "$mkfs is not a binary, will not overwrite"
exit 1
fi
fi
mkfs=`type -p mkfs.btrfs.real`
if [ $? != 0 ]; then
echo "Cannot find mkfs.btrfs.real, install the wrapper properly"
exit 1
fi
force=
if grep -q 'Use the -f option to force overwrite' $mkfs; then
force='-f'
fi
$mkfs $force "$@"
---
--
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
