The libmount dependency has been added in commit 61ecaff036
("btrfs-progs: build: add libmount dependency"), and static build got
broken. There are functions that do basically the same thing and also
share the name, which in turn fails at link time.
ld: /../lib64/libmount.a(libcommon_la-canonicalize.o): in function `canonicalize_dm_name':
util-linux-2.34/lib/canonicalize.c:58: multiple definition of `canonicalize_dm_name';
common/path-utils.static.o:btrfs-progs/common/path-utils.c:286: first defined here
In case the collision can be resolved by renaming, it's done
(canonicalize_path and parse_size). There are 2 symbols from selinux
that are substituted by a weak aliases during the static build.
There's one new warning due to use of getgrnam_r in libmount that
depends on dynamic linking and may not work properly with static build.
We're not using the related functions directly or indirectly, so it
should be safe to ignore the warnings.
ld: ../lib64/libmount.a(la-utils.o): in function `mnt_get_gid':
util-linux-2.34/libmount/src/utils.c:625: warning: Using 'getgrnam_r' in statically linked applications
+requires at runtime the shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking
Issue: #333
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
According to the documentation, btrfs qgroup remove takes the same
options as qgroup assign, i.e., --rescan and --no-rescan. However,
currently no options are accepted. Activate option handling also for
qgroup remove, so that automatic rescan can be disabled by the user.
Signed-off-by: Michael Lass <bevan@bi-co.net>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
When kernel returns ENOTCONN after the user tries to create a qgroup on
a subvolume without quota enabled, present a meaningful message to the
user. Kernels before 5.5 return EINVAL for that.
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcos Paulo de Souza <mpdesouza@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
The only difference between parse_limit and parse_size is that
parse_limit accepts "none" as a valid input. That's easy enough to
handle as a special case and lets us drop the duplicate code.
Reviewed-by: Qu Wenruo <wqu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
For options that do not have the long description, the empty string is
required to mark where the options start. Some commands were missing
that.
Signed-off-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
David Sterba
Michael Lass
Marcos Paulo de Souza
Jeff Mahoney