On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 07:12 -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote: > I kind of agree with Christoph here. I don't think that noload > should > be the what we actually use, although I do think having it as an > alias > for whatever name we end up using would be a good thing. No, because people would start using it, getting used to it, and in 4 years we could never change it again,... which may be necessary... noload, seems to mean don't load the journal. Unless btrfs gets a journal in the sense xfs/ext has one, it simply should either not use that name at all... or not try to "map" it to something of it's own which is similar, but in reality not the same. Chris.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
