xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing

To: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Announce] XFS 1.1 Prerelease 2 available for testing
From: Tony Gale <gale@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 27 Mar 2002 15:55:26 +0000
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxx>, Florin Andrei <florin@xxxxxxx>, Simon Matter <simon.matter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1017242992.27964.13.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0203262227050.17959-100000@chuckle.americas.sgi.com> <3CA179E7.7413F25@ch.sauter-bc.com> <1017235934.29730.6.camel@stantz.corp.sgi.com> <1017240266.16216.8.camel@syntax.dstl.gov.uk> <20020327155602.A7730@caldera.de> <1017241257.14218.15.camel@syntax.dstl.gov.uk> <20020327162003.A8199@caldera.de> <1017242992.27964.13.camel@jen.americas.sgi.com>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2002-03-27 at 15:29, Steve Lord wrote:
> 
> So, it is OK for people to rip the guts out of the VM every other week
> and for Al Viro to apply so many patches the filesystem API that your
> head spins, but a filesystem which does anything outside the VFS box
> is regarded as an invasion.
> 
> Gutting XFS to remove all the code which would not work without kernel
> changes removes a lot of the reasons people use XFS in the first place.
> 

Yes, I don't believe that's a goer.

But, now you've bitten Steve, why aren't you/SGI pushing XFS
split-patches at Linus/Al/lkml regularly?

Is it because you don't think they are ready? I don't agree that
advertising is the way to get things into the kernel - pure bloody
mindedness seems more effective.

You are at least likely to get some feedback on why they aren't
currently being included.

-tony



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