xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 2.4.20-18 Red Hat errata kernel with XFS 1.2.0

To: "Bryan J. Smith" <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.4.20-18 Red Hat errata kernel with XFS 1.2.0
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Date: 11 Jun 2003 16:50:50 -0500
Cc: Austin Gonyou <austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Seth Mos <knuffie@xxxxxxxxx>, Paulo Matos <pjsm@xxxxxxxxxx>, XFS List <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1055367876.3ee7a2c43f7ef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20030610133612.0326eba0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1055366915.1925.55.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1055367400.11067.143.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1055367876.3ee7a2c43f7ef@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2003-06-11 at 16:44, Bryan J. Smith wrote:

> So what you're saying is that [nearly] all of the core kernel changes are 
> static?  That is, other than 
> to accomodate changes by the kernel between versions that affect select XFS 
> added portions?

for a given kernel rev, the xfs<->kernel interface has stabilized quite
a lot, yes.  Not to say it will never change, of course.

> Has this been so since the 1.0 release?

ahh... nope.  :)

> Does 2.5/2.6 completely take care of providing these interfaces?

XFS is in 2.5, so it's mostly a moot point.  It's possible that from
time to time, updated XFS in CVS will require a kernel change that is
not in Linus' tree, of course.

Is that what you're asking?

-Eric

-- 
Eric Sandeen      XFS for Linux     http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs
sandeen@xxxxxxx   SGI, Inc.         651-683-3102


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