Re: [BUG] symlink problem with knfsd and reiserfs

[Hans-Peter Jansen]

On Tuesday, 15. January 2002 18:53, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> Hans-Peter Jansen writes:
>  > On Tuesday, 15. January 2002 17:47, Nikita Danilov wrote:
>
> 3.6. is advantageous because of many other things, like LFS, etc.
>
>  > How big is the chance to loose data with -o conv?
>
> There were problems with -o conv and remount (for root file system), but
> they were cured in latest Marcelo's kernels.
>
>  > Is there any paper around, which describes this conversion
>  > a bit more detailed? If I understand you correctly, the inode
>  > generation counter doesn't work at all with 3.5?
>
> After file system is mounted with -o conv, all new files will be created
> in a new format. This file system will then no longer be mountable as
> 3.5 (and thus, inaccessible from 2.2 kernels).
>
> New files will store generation counters. The possibility of a stale
> handle lurking undetected is when old-format file was deleted, its
> objectid was reused for new format file, and super-block generation
> counter at that time happens to coincide with objectid of parent
> directory of the old file. Not exactly likely thing to happen, but
> still.

I will meditate over the last paragraph later. I decided to follow your 
first advice...

I think, this is worth a note in the reiserfs-FAQ. And remember: allmost
all linux distributions will use 3.5 to ensure backward compatibility.

Also note, that web man page and mkreiserfs -h disagree on the -v option.
I will believe mkreiserfs.

If I use notail mount option on a already populated partition, what happens
to the "tailed" files? I expect, only newly created ones get there own block.

>
> Nikita.
>
Cheers,
  Hans-Peter