Re: hmm, dependencies

[Redeeman <redeeman@metanurb.dk>]

On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 20:30 +0300, Vladimir Saveliev wrote:
> Hello
> 
> On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 18:22, Redeeman wrote:
> > On Fri, 2004-12-17 at 16:55 +0300, Vladimir Saveliev wrote:
> > > Hello
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 22:56, Redeeman wrote:
> > > > hello.. reiser4 is now in mm, but i realize that nearly all of the stuff
> > > > that was mm specific when the move to mm was made, are probably merged
> > > > into upstream by now, i wonder, can anyone tell me exactly what from mm
> > > > it depends on?
> > > > 
> > > > thanks
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > reiser4 got included into mm not because it needed something of it, but
> > > rather because it is supposed that being in mm for certain amount of
> > > time reiser4 will get a lot of testing and will prove that it is worth
> > > to get included into stock kernel. 
> > im aware, however, the reiser4 patches in mm are against mm, which means
> > it depends on something from it, and i'd like to find out what :D so
> > that i can take it out and apply to vanilla along with reiser4
> 
> did you see ftp.namesys.com/pub/reiser4-for-2.6/2.6.9?
> It contains all things which reiser4 depends on.
nice
> 
> If you would like to add reiser4 to vanilla kernel yourself you would
> have to add reiser4 patches of mm kernel to vanilla one:
> 
> people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.X/2.6.X-mmY/broken-out/reiser4-*
> and add the patch i am attaching to this email.
> 
yeah i tried that, however they dont patch against latest vanilla, it
would seem the vfs has changed abit.. i just wondered if anyone knew
exactly which of the mm patches was needed to make up for this, but, now
you gave me that url :) never mind..

thanks

-- 
Redeeman <redeeman@metanurb.dk>