From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <200202282117.g1SLHxd21267@copernicus.cs.utwente.nl>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] fs config problem status update (still unsolved)
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 28 Feb 2002 16:09:07 -0500."
             <6f1e535b5006a4d39a822acbd26f140e@plan9.bell-labs.com> 
References: <6f1e535b5006a4d39a822acbd26f140e@plan9.bell-labs.com> 
From: Axel Belinfante <Axel.Belinfante@cs.utwente.nl>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 22:17:59 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5c7f4714-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> > Is the ide-patched fs kernel 'compatible' with the plan9pc one?
> > Or do the on-disk structures differ (w.r.t. 'using 16K blocks') 
> 
> it's just a compile-time constant; you can recompile, right?


Certainly. But with my fs in the state that it is now,
I thought I'd try for a change to ask (a) question(s) first,
rather than only after the calf has drowned :-)
(or however you say this in english).

Thanks for confirming that indeed this is a compile time constant,
Axel.