| To: | SGI XFS Dev List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Linux 2.5 or now 2.6 targeted |
| From: | Alan Eldridge <alane@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 14 Oct 2001 07:49:40 -0400 |
| In-reply-to: | <200110141140.f9EBeJt15227@jen.americas.sgi.com>; from lord@sgi.com on Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 06:40:19AM -0500 |
| References: | <alane@geeksrus.net> <200110141140.f9EBeJt15227@jen.americas.sgi.com> |
| Sender: | owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 06:40:19AM -0500, Steve Lord wrote: > >As for code duplication - there is maybe one operation which has major >overlap - xfs_rename. If we take out code in the mainline kernel then we >loose about half of what XFS can do and might as well go home anyway. Did I misunderstand earlier discussions (the nudge Alan Cox thread) then? I inferred it meant that XFS was doing the same things, in different ways, than the mainline kernel. By what you just said, I think I erred. Is the issue really that the code is not confined to the FS layer, but that XFS needs additional, mainline, code to function? -- Alan Eldridge from std_disclaimer import * |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Linux 2.5 or now 2.6 targeted, Alan Eldridge |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: include/acl.h in 2.4.13-pre2, Steve Lord |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Linux 2.5 or now 2.6 targeted, Alan Eldridge |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Linux 2.5 or now 2.6 targeted, Derek Glidden |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |