On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 11:01 PM, Josh Carroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi josh, >> >> Exactly, it is 256. So according to you, I can't use the mounted >> filesystem, right? >> >> Could you please explain in more detail, what the problem is? >> >> Thanks in advance. > > I believe around e2fsprogs version 1.40.5 or so, they changed the > default inode size from 128 to 256. The current ext2fs driver in > FreeBSD has a hard-coded inode size defined: > > #define EXT2_INODE_SIZE 128 > > I have a patch that dynamically determines this size, but I do not yet > have a good enough understanding of the ext2/3 spec to decide if the > changes I made are sufficient to fix the problem or if there is some > risk of breakage because the extra 128 is required for some metadata > of some sort. > > What happened in your case is something I was afraid of and what > prompted me to look into a fix in the first place - namely, newer > Linux distributions or even file systems created by e2fsprogs from > ports in FreeBSD will be unusable with the current ext2fs driver, > since it assumes a size of 128. > > There is some more information here regarding the patch and its current > status: > > http://unix.derkeiler.com/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/stable/2008-11/msg00421.html > > I (or even better, someone more knowledgeable about file systems) need > to read through the ext2/3 spec and determine if the changes I've made > cause any breakage.
Ok, Thanks for the clarification and overall, thanks for the work of submitting the patch regardless of it is merged yet or not. > > Thanks, > Josh > _______________________________________________ email@example.com mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"