[Top] [All Lists]

Re: getting changes (fixes or enhancements) to xfs-tools

To: "Linda A. Walsh" <xfs@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: getting changes (fixes or enhancements) to xfs-tools
From: Klaus Strebel <klaus.strebel@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:55:11 +0200
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <49E8D28F.9000500@xxxxxxxxx>
References: <615709150.3493811239917317690.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <49E8D28F.9000500@xxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)
Linda A. Walsh schrieb:
Nathan Scott wrote:
    I understand you want people to see the work that has gone into
kernel, but telling someone to search through 1327 entries just to
an answer of 'no', seems a bit ...something.

    Those are files from the actual utilities?  I.e. the
source code for the utilities is stored in the kernel tree?  That the
support routines for the utilities have changes doesn't imply that
one would expect to find source-changes for the utils there unless
the utils are in the kernel tree -- but I don't think so(?)  Like the
'util-linux' utils, I have the impression they are stored outside of
the kernel tree.

    No need to answer to tell me the util sources are not stored
in the kernel (if that's the case), as that's my current "world view" :-).
But if I need to update my current world view (again), I hope you'll
_gently_ let me know. :-)

Hi Linda,

your misunderstanding, git.kernel.org is a site where several git repositories are hosted, no the kernel source tree ;-). The fs/xfs/xxx.git is the path of the git-repository of the xfs-tools, i doesn't mean it's in the kernel source in the directory fs/xfs ... Even the sources for ext2 ( 3, 4 ), btrfs, jfs, reiserfs et al. are not part of the Linux source tree, so what made you thinking that?


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