| To: | nscott@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms |
| From: | "Geir A. Myrestrand" <geir.myrestrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 07 Dec 2006 16:51:13 -0500 |
| Cc: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <1165527628.30459.31.camel@edge> |
| Organization: | FalconStor Software, Inc. |
| References: | <4560AB84.9060200@xxxxxxxxxxx> <45784E71.4080605@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <457854CB.5030507@xxxxxxxxxxx> <45787ED4.5070801@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1165525906.30459.25.camel@edge> <45788927.4030207@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1165527628.30459.31.camel@edge> |
| Reply-to: | geir.myrestrand@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025) |
Nathan Scott wrote: On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 16:35 -0500, Geir A. Myrestrand wrote:It wouldn't be easy for me to switch to a newer kernel, because it is not just a matter of my machine --we have a product built for this particular configuration. Switching to a new kernel would reset our QA efforts.You misunderstood me I think - I didn't suggest switching kernels, just that you test out the latest. If its OK, then its relatively easy to search for a change that fixed it. If its not OK, then theres a bug in mainline which should get some attention too. Sorry Nathan, but I'm not sure I understand what you refer to with "test out the latest" --are you referring to the kernel or XFS? -- Geir A. Myrestrand |
| Previous by Date: | Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: New CentOS4/RHEL4-compatible xfs module rpms, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |