From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 14 13:41:04 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 553A316A4CE; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:41:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de (mailhub.fokus.fraunhofer.de
	[193.174.154.14])	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id CD11743D5E; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:40:35 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de)
Received: from beagle (beagle [193.175.132.100])i0ELeYL05836;
	Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:40:34 +0100 (MET)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 22:40:34 +0100 (CET)
From: Harti Brandt <brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200401142135.i0ELZE7E040516@gw.catspoiler.org>
Message-ID: <20040114223816.Y15513@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de>
References: <200401142135.i0ELZE7E040516@gw.catspoiler.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: rwatson@FreeBSD.org
cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: simplifying linux_emul_convpath()
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: harti@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:41:04 -0000

On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Don Lewis wrote:

DL>On 14 Jan, Robert Watson wrote:
DL>
DL>> ino_t probably does need to get bumped to 64-bit on FreeBSD at some point,
DL>> because at some point we will have a local file system that can usefully
DL>> represent more than 2 billion files.  I assume we didn't do the bump with
DL>> UFS2 because of the potential disruption for applications, etc.
DL>
DL>We'd have a heck of a time fsck'ing such a file system on a 32 bit
DL>machine.

If, as a user, I could select between a fast fsck and backups that don't
have random filenames linked to each other and lost files, I'd select the
good backups.

But that's just my opinion :-)

harti
-- 
harti brandt,
http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/research/cc/cats/employees/hartmut.brandt/private
brandt@fokus.fraunhofer.de, harti@freebsd.org