xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FC1 + XFS 1.3.1: test SRPM available

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: FC1 + XFS 1.3.1: test SRPM available
From: Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:14:57 +0100
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1068164684.1405.42.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1068164684.1405.42.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 06:24:44PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> So I was feeling charitable today...
> 
> You'll find an SRPM in ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/testing/FC1 that
> seems to more or less pass our QA suite.  It's a hurry-up job though, so
> give it some cautious testing if you'd like.

Thanks Erik!

> To the RH folks, if you're listening, I think I've done patches in such
> a way that you can strip out acls & dmapi, and have a functional xfs
> with extremely minimal impact to the rest of the kernel. 
> (linux-2.4.22-xfs-exports.patch is the only thing we -really- need to be
> able to ship an out-of-kernel module, linux-2.4.22-xfs-inode-init.patch
> would be nice).

I have updated the ATrpms' kernels for FC1 to sync with your src.rpm,
e.g. ATrpms goes XFS 1.3.1 (previously it was 1.3.0).

Well, not a really big difference, but at least SCO cannot sue me
anymore ;)

I'd be interested in minimizing [1] kernel patches and building XFS
out of the tree (so that the needed patches could be pushed easier
into RH/ac kernels). I won't have time until the end of the year, but
if anyone manages to do so, I will gladly repackage his/her recipe
into kernel and xfs-kmdl rpms.

[1] minimizing as in full functional together with the XFS kernel
    modules, not minimizing as in castrated-without-acls ;)
-- 
Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: pgpYAT14bIoME.pgp
Description: PGP signature

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