On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 06:16:25PM +0200, Nikolay Ivanets wrote: > вт, 11 лют. 2020 о 17:20 Richard W.M. Jones <[email protected]> пише: > > > > I pushed this with some trailing whitespace fixes, and I dropped the > > change to tmp/.gitignore since the test does clean up after itself. I > > also fixed test-qemu-drive-with-blocksize-libvirt.sh so it doesn't > > actually open /dev/sda etc on the host (don't run tests as root!) > > Thanks! > > > However ... > > > > We already use blocksize as an optional parameter to mkfs. While they > > don't directly conflict, it is confusing. Is there a reason we > > shouldn't call this new parameter "sectorsize"? > > > > We can change the parameter name any time up til we make the next > > stable release. > > But mkfs has 'sectorsize' optional parameter as well. :-) > Here are my thoughts: > 1. Our 'blocksize' parameter is related to disks and it's using everywhere in > context of disks. It hardly can confuse users with mkfs' blocksize which is > related to a file system. > 2. Under the hood this parameter is tied to physical/logical block size so it > named accordingly.
OK fair enough. I didn't spot that it had "sectorsize" too. Let's leave it alone. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html _______________________________________________ Libguestfs mailing list [email protected] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libguestfs
