xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Patch handling

To: Gerd Bitzer <gbitzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Patch handling
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 16 Oct 2001 15:18:51 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <3BCC9464.2060601@tesionmail.de>
References: <3BCC9464.2060601@tesionmail.de>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
hi Gerd -

On Tue, 2001-10-16 at 15:11, Gerd Bitzer wrote:
 
> Can I download a linux 2.4.5 source tree and your 1.0.1 patch and apply 
> it, and after this only apply the official kernelpatches against the 
> kernel sources, to patch up to newer kernel releases ?

You can try this, but you will have conflicts to resolve.

> Or do I have to maintain a clean kernelsource tree, which I can patch up 
> to the newest kernel release, and after this procedure can patch in your 
> appropriate kernel patch ?

That's the the best way to do it... a little more disk space, a lot less
time.  :)

> Is there a way (when using xfs as module) not to patch it into the 
> original kernel source, but only to compile it ?

There are hooks in the kernel itself that are needed, so a stand-alone
"xfs" package won't work.
 
> I do not want to maintain an original kernel source tree which I am able 
> to patch up to newer kernel versions and an additional version, where I 
> have patched an appropriate version of xfs into, I only want to have 
> original kernel sources which I can use as I need, I do not want to have 
> extra work with an extra xfs kernel.

Talk to Linus and Alan.  ;-)

> I think xfs is the most advanced filesystem around, when will it be in 
> the official kernel source tree ?

See previous answer.  :)  Seriously, this is a goal, but there is no
timetable for this... as in most things Linux-related.
 
> keep up the good work

Thanks,

-Eric
-- 
Eric Sandeen      XFS for Linux     http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
sandeen@xxxxxxx   SGI, Inc.


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