On 21 September 2014 13:59, Tobias Geerinckx-Rice
<tobias.geerinckx.rice@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21 September 2014 03:01, Dimitri John Ledkov <xnox@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Inspect arguments, if we are not called as btrfs, then assume we are
>> called to act like fsck.
> [...]
>> - if (!strcmp(bname, "btrfsck")) {
>> + if (strcmp(bname, "btrfs") != 0) {
>
> That's assuming a lot.
>
> Silently (!) breaking people's btrfs-3.15_patched-DontRandomlyPanicV2
> is a recipe for needless hair-pulling. Is there a reason for not using
> something less like strstr(bname, "fsck") that I am missing?
>
Quite. This is verbatim patch as I have currently applied in Debian
packaging, and it was a fast fix to prevent breakage we had at one
point.
Indeed using "strstr(bname, "fsck")" would be better and sufficient to
resolve the problem we encountered (specifically fsck.btrfs -> btrfs
not acting like btrfs). Also using strstr, would fix btrfsck.my-build
to act like fsck tool.
I'll update this one patch.
--
Regards,
Dimitri.
--
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
