Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:38:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0-pre1-r499012 (2007-01-23) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.2.0-pre1-r499012 Received: from sandeen.net (sandeen.net [209.173.210.139]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id l8NMc0Q3007654 for ; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 15:38:00 -0700 Received: from liberator.sandeen.net (liberator.sandeen.net [10.0.0.4]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sandeen.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E0818011E8D; Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:38:02 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <46F6EACA.5040607@sandeen.net> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2007 17:38:02 -0500 From: Eric Sandeen User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Macintosh/20070728) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: markgw@sgi.com CC: Christoph Hellwig , David Chinner , xfs-dev , xfs-oss , trev , "Kevin G. Snow" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4 of 4] Restore ihashsize mount option as deprecated References: <20070809114548.GG12413810@sgi.com> <46F4390A.5070407@sandeen.net> <20070923075756.GP995458@sgi.com> <20070923100039.GA5370@infradead.org> <46F67BD3.8050706@sandeen.net> <46F6E344.20907@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <46F6E344.20907@sgi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.90, clamav-milter version devel-120207 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-archive-position: 13053 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: sandeen@sandeen.net Precedence: bulk X-list: xfs Mark Goodwin wrote: > > Eric Sandeen wrote: >> Christoph Hellwig wrote: >>> Did anyone but Dave get Eric's original message? It seems to not have >>> made it to the list. >>> >> No, it was yet another lost email on oss. I guess the xfs-dev list got it. >> >> >From a fairly quick look at logs I have no idea what happened... but >> this is clearly a problem that must be solved one way or another. > > Have we (or can we) agree on a new list handler? The current mechanism > has trouble allowing new subscribers That appeared to be spamfilter misfires. > and now we see it's loosing mail > too. Not sure anyone has gotten to the bottom of this new problem. -Eric > Let's get this fixed and move on. Who owns this on oss? If nobody, > then I'll organize it, but first we need consensus on a replacement. > > Thanks >