[Top] [All Lists]

[xfs-masters] Re: request for patches: showing mount options

To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [xfs-masters] Re: request for patches: showing mount options
From: Ian Kent <raven@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 14:45:59 +0800
Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, kzak@xxxxxxxxxx, ericvh@xxxxxxxxx, lucho@xxxxxxxxxx, zippel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, rathamahata@xxxxxxx, dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx, sfrench@xxxxxxxxx, mhalcrow@xxxxxxxxxx, phillip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hirofumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, mikulas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, wli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shaggy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, vandrove@xxxxxxxxxx, trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx, aia21@xxxxxxxxxx, mark.fasheh@xxxxxxxxxx, kurt.hackel@xxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, bfennema@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, dushistov@xxxxxxx, xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx, arnd@xxxxxxxx, holzheu@xxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E1IERvH-00016M-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
References: <E1IEQ7q-0000qE-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu> <1185550256.3203.77.camel@raven.themaw.net> <E1IERvH-00016M-00@dorka.pomaz.szeredi.hu>
Reply-to: xfs-masters@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xfs-masters-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 17:40 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >   all - fs has options, but doesn't define ->show_options()
> >   some - fs defines ->show_options(), but some options are not shown
> >   noopt - fs does not have options
> >   good - fs shows all options
> >   patch - I have a patch
> [...]
> > > autofs      all
> > 
> > I'm not sure I understand this.
> > How does autofs show it's options without a ->show_options method?
> It doesn't.  The "all" means, all of them need to be added to
> ->show_options(), not that all are shown.

Oh .. sorry, I wasn't paying enough attention.

But now might be a good time to propose the removal of autofs and rename
autofs4 to autofs. I would need to provide some way to map autofs4
module load requests to autofs for backward compatibility but haven't
thought about that yet.

> I can see now that this is slightly confusing, sorry.
> So the ones that need attention are "all" and "some".  The others are
> fine in theory.  Of course I may have missed something.
> > > autofs4     some
> > 
> > OK, uid and gid aren't shown.
> > That should be straight forward to fix.
> > What's your time frame for this?
> ASAP ;)
> 2.6.24 would be a nice, but it won't be easy...

The autofs4 (and, if needed autofs) should be straight forward.
I'll do these.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>