Re: [RFC] InodeEtag option

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

From: "Rodent of Unusual Size" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2001 3:01 PM


> "Dietz, Phil E." wrote:
> > 
> > - the allow_options_t size increased to a long because all 8 bits
> > of char were in use.
> 
> Ouch.  I think that has killed changes to Options in the past.

So do we

1. bite the bullet and increment the mmn?

2. add more_options as a long at the end of the structure, increment
   the mmn, and perhaps some authors get away with ignoring the bump?

Bill