Petter Reinholdtsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Goswin von Brederlow]
>> 100GiB is either way to high (for my 200MB / partition) or way too
>> low (for my 1TiB data partition). I think the value should be less
>> than 16TiB (maximum size) and no more than 10 times the filesystem
>> size.
>
> Yeah. I read from the mke2fs manual page that -O resize_inode set the
> max-size to 1024 times the current size. That might be an OK default
> for ext2prepare as well. Perhaps it should be patched to make that
> argument optional, and use 1024 * current size in that case. Patches
> most welcome. :)
Doesn't that waste a ton of space for resizing or is that just a minor
part in the superblocks? If the size impact is so small then I retract
my 10* limit.
>> It would probably be worth a patch to mke2fs to output in D-I
>> progress format though instead of parsing the current output and
>> translating that.
>
> Yes. But I am not sure if such patch would make it into etch in time. :)
Well, last week/month would definetly have been better.
>> But all of this won't remove the need for ext2prepare. Afaik there
>> is no option for mke2fs to build a filesystem already perpared for
>> resizing.
>
> Are you aware of the -O resize_inode option to mk32fs, currently the
> default for mke2fs?
I am now. Thanks.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
