From owner-freebsd-current  Mon Nov 25  1: 7:29 2002
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 1C61137B401; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 01:07:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02.attbi.com [204.127.202.62])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 6C27443EAA; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 01:07:27 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from julian@elischer.org)
Received: from InterJet.elischer.org (12-232-168-4.client.attbi.com[12.232.168.4])
          by sccrmhc02.attbi.com (sccrmhc02) with ESMTP
          id <2002112509072100200t3pgfe>; Mon, 25 Nov 2002 09:07:21 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1])
	by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id BAA39043;
	Mon, 25 Nov 2002 01:08:32 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2002 01:08:30 -0800 (PST)
From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@beastie.mckusick.com>
Cc: current@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@tislabs.com>,
	re@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Update to UFS2 Superblock Format 
In-Reply-To: <200211250619.gAP6J059068226@beastie.mckusick.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211250107060.34466-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-current.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-current>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-current>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG



On Sun, 24 Nov 2002, Kirk McKusick wrote:

> Some of these fields could usefully be made unsigned others not
> (for example fs_pendingblocks and fs_pendinginodes). So just
> going through and making everything unsigned is not the right
> approach. I will make a pass through and consider changing some
> of these fields once the tree opens back up, but not at this
> point in time when we are trying to keep changes to a minimum
> and do not have time for extensive testing.
> 
> 	Kirk McKusick

I'm not in a hurry.. It's just something that I thought should be
considered..... "eventually".

BTW how can fs_pendingblocks and fs_pendinginodes be -ve?




To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message