[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Use CVS version or kernel patch?

To: Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Use CVS version or kernel patch?
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2001 08:46:24 -0500
Cc: Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: Message from Florian Weimer <Florian.Weimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> of "08 Oct 2001 15:13:36 +0200." <tgg08u46m7.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Keith Owens <kaos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Are you feeling lucky?
> Full moon tonight? ;-)
> > The CVS tree is bleeding edge with minimal testing.
> Does it include new significant XFS development, or is it just
> tracking the mainline kernel?

Pretty much everything new in cvs is for tracking newer kernels, or
for XFS bug fixing. There is not much in the way of feature work 
ongoing at the moment - a new acl interface is being worked on as
is the quota interface, but these are not directly in the tree
right now.


> > The kernel patches, particularly the official releases (1.0.1
> > is current) get much more testing but are against older kernels.
> Exactly that's the problem.  For example, at least one significant bug
> has been fixed in 2.4.7, therefore I would hate to go back to 2.4.5
> (although the fix is trivial).
> -- 
> Florian Weimer                          Florian.Weimer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
> RUS-CERT                          +49-711-685-5973/fax +49-711-685-5898

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