On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 01:58:11PM -0500, Robert Huff wrote: > > Erik Trulsson writes: > > > > Question (for anyone who has an informed opinion): > > > If there any technical reason that couldn't be expanded to 32 > > > bits? Or is it possible but not done for historical or > > > policy reasons, and if so what are they? > > > > It probably could be expanded to 32 bits if that was deemed > > useful. Doing that would of course require re-creating any > > existing filesystems since the on-disk format would change, which > > would be a PITA for users, but certainly possible. > > I seem to remember at least one case (3.x -> 4.0 ????) where a > major version change had no upgrade path - to get the new stuff you > had to reinstall.
You are probably thinking of the 4.x -> 5.x upgrade where you pretty much had to reinstall if you wanted to switch from UFS1 to UFS2. (But you could of course keep using UFS1 if you wanted.) > But I agree there's no reason based on current evidence to do > this. > Thanks. > > > Robert Huff -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"