Re: [ext2resize] Re: Odd stride issues

[Andreas D. <ad...@cl...>]

On Sep 12, 2002  11:49 -0700, Robert Walsh wrote:
> Attached is the output of two different mke2fs's on a small loopback
> file.  One has the resize inode.  The other doesn't.  Neither had a
> stride specified.  As you can see, the one that has the resize inode has
> a different layout depending on whether there is supposed to be a backup
> super block there or not, which is what is causing ext2online to get
> upset.

This may have something to do with how the libext2 code does block
allocation.  I would think that it puts all of the inode tables at
the same offsets, but it might be missing a "reserved_gdt" count in
its initial calculations.

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/