[haiku-development] Re: Patches

  • From: "Adrien Destugues" <pulkomandy@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: haiku-development@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:19:43 +0200

> I removed the additional check from the IsValid function of the 
> superblock, because while reading the linux implementation, it still 
mounts it normally (even if it has > errors) but gives out a warning 
that the file system should be verified. What would be the correct way 
to handle such errors (ie. check required)? Also, linux checks > the 
revision number, and if it's unrecognized, it only mounts the file 
system in read only mode. I assume this is for forward compatibility. 
Should I handle it the same > way? 

I think mounting it read-only and outputting the error to the syslog is 
a good way to warn in these cases

> Also, I am currently implementing initial journal support, and I 
> think I'll do the idea to apply the journal changes in memory when the 
file system is mounted as read-only. Is it okay if I publish the 
incomplete code online somewhere so people can view and comment before 
I do an actual patch submission?

I think it is. You can also send the patch to the mailing list, stating 
that you know it's not ready.

Other related posts: