Re: reiserfs resizing problem

[Yury Umanets]

Andrew Clausen wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 02:08:13AM +0300, Yura Umanets wrote:
>  
>
> > Probably the message for "Not implemented yet..." for reiserfs should be 
> > like "libreiserfs is not activated..."
> >    
>
> Well, it does give the warning on startup that there's a version
> mismatch.  I suspect it wasn't finding his library.
>
>  
>
> > I know, is some function implemented or not decided the code on higher 
> > level of abstraction then particulat filesystem implementation. But, 
> > some users do not know, that reiserfs is supportable in the principle :)
Sorry for english :) It is deep night in Moscow and my mind is not very 
fair :)
I've mean, that parted API functions (ped_fs_resize, etc) make checks is 
corresponding method in filesystem implementation exists or not. And if 
not, the function throws exception with message "Sorry, $ability is not 
implemented...".

Because of this you can't change the behavior (like throwing other 
message than I've denoted above) for reiserfs in right way. It would be 
stupid to perform some check on API level.

In pseudo code:
if (fs == reiserfs) {
   throw one exception
} else {
   throw another exception
}


I'm correct?

> >    
>
> Hmmm, how could you make such a distinction?
See above :)

>  
>
> > > Yura: did you send me a patch for the new version?  It should be easy
> > > for me to figure out, in any case.
> > >      
> > I'm working on it right now :) A lot of bugs. Probably I will send it 
> > you soon. Even if it will buggy. You might help me in your free time. 
> > I'm correct?
> >    
>
> Sure :)
Good :)

> Cheers,
> Andrew
>
>
>  


--
Yury Umanets