I'm also kind of curious about the replication of updates and
backporting of bug fixes, etc from 2.6 and vice versa.
i.e. will XFS version for 2.6 and 2.4 remain in-sync?
On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 13:26, Greg Freemyer wrote:
> That means XFS should be in 2.4.24?
>
> Or in a later version.
>
>
> On Mon, 2003-12-08 at 07:19, Stefan Smietanowski wrote:
> > Thought everybody would be interested. Not everybody are on lkml.
> >
> > // Stefan
> >
> >
> >
> > -------- Original Message --------
> > Subject: XFS merged in 2.4
> > Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 09:22:16 -0200 (BRST)
> > From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > FYI
> >
> > Christoph reviewed XFS patch which changed generic code, and it was
> > stripped down later to a set of changes which dont modify the code
> > behaviour (except for a few bugfixes which should have been included
> > separately anyway) and are pretty obvious.
> >
> > So its that has been merged, along with fs/xfs/.
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
> linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >
> >
> >
--
Austin Gonyou <austin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Coremetrics, Inc.
|