xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree

To: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: loop-6 and the XFS tree
From: Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 15:32:37 +0100
In-reply-to: <20010228145658.Q453@suse.de>
References: <20010228145021.P453@suse.de> <news2mail-97fo1e$rb$3@mate.bln.innominate.de> <20010227153839.D16652@suse.de> <news2mail-97ii91$cnk$1@mate.bln.innominate.de> <20010228142712.N453@suse.de> <20010228145021.P453@suse.de>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
At 14:56 28-2-2001 +0100, you wrote:
On Wed, Feb 28 2001, Jens Axboe wrote:
> > should look like. Make the size_t unsigned int instead in loop
> > and rd.
>
> My mistake, I was looking at the wrong function. There's no
> mixup in the xfs tree.

I would provide a patch for rd too, but the tree still has the kgcc
stupidity that prevents me from compiling. Yes I could fix it easily,
but it annoys me heavily that such a change was made blindly
assuming that we all need kgcc. So I'm holding further contributions
for now until this is fixed -- yes I'm silly, but so is this
assumption.

I agree, I build the tree more often on non redhat 7 boxes. Btw, gcc 2.95.2 seems to work under debian 2.2_r2. Not really tested, but it compiles and mounting worked.


--
Jens Axboe

-- Seth Has anybody seen my lightbulb? I _really_ need some light here.


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