Re: [PATCH] Refuse to install on XFS destroying its superblock

[Robert Millan]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 02:09:31PM +0200, Vladimir 'phcoder' Serbinenko wrote:
> >> The danger is that fs_probe may reject filesystem as valid just because
> >> it's newer than expected.
> >>     
> >
> > What do you mean with "reject filesystem as valid"?
> >
> >   
> Sorry for being unclear. I just meant that if some XFS structures are
> updated then our xfs driver won't recognise it as xfs

What do you mean with "updated"?  You mean a new implementation of XFS?  Or
the same instance of XFS that has been modified after use?

-- 
Robert Millan

  The DRM opt-in fallacy: "Your data belongs to us. We will decide when (and
  how) you may access your data; but nobody's threatening your freedom: we
  still allow you to remove your data and not access it at all."