Re: e2fsprogs backport?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 02:02:56PM (GMT+0200), Frederik wrote:
> Recent kernel versions, like the one in backports.org, support ext3
> online resizing. But to do this, e2fsprogs >= 1.39 is required, while
> Sarge has 1.37. Could a backport me made?
I made it, available here :
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/comerr-dev_2.1-1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsck-static_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fslibs_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fslibs-dev_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs_1.39-1~bpo.1.diff.gz>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs_1.39-1~bpo.1.dsc>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.changes>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs_1.39.orig.tar.gz>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/e2fsprogs-udeb_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.udeb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libblkid1_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libblkid1-udeb_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.udeb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libblkid-dev_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libcomerr2_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libss2_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libuuid1_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/libuuid1-udeb_1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.udeb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/ss-dev_2.0-1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
<http://people.via.ecp.fr/~babal/e2fsprogs_1.39/uuid-dev_1.2-1.39-1~bpo.1_i386.deb>
(if you want to install these packages manually, you need to install at
least e2fsprogs and e2fslibs AFTER having apt-get install'ed libselinux1
and libsepol1. BIG FAT WARNING : dependencies for these packages are
not trivial, proceed carefully if you don't want to end with apt-get
removing base packages)
But I wonder whether it is wise to include it in sarge-backports,
because there was a lot of changes between 1.37 and 1.39, and numerous
packages depend on the included libraries.
Maybe Mr Theodore Y. Ts'o might give us some usefull insight about that ?
However if people think it's safe, these packages are ready to be
reviewed and uploaded.
--
Boris Dorès
Reply to: