From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Oleg Drokin Subject: Re: Recommended patches for mail server? Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 16:29:23 +0400 Message-ID: <20021015162923.A992@namesys.com> References: <20021015105521.71AE11AEC14C@server5.fastmail.fm> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021015105521.71AE11AEC14C@server5.fastmail.fm> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: JP Howard Cc: ReiserFS List Hello! On Tue, Oct 15, 2002 at 10:55:21AM +0000, JP Howard wrote: > > They should apply cleanly, if you are worried about some offsets, this is > > ok and should not concern you. (just use -s switch to patch command > > to not see unneeded output ;) ) > I got quite a few HUNK FAILED. Also, I found that with the data logging > patches these other patches didn't apply cleanly. Hm. You apply the patches in order, is that right? > Could you please tell me which, if any, of these patches are important? > Also, I noticed 07-mmaped_data_loss_fix.diff here: > http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0201.3/1161.html 07-mmaped_data_loss_fix.diff is in 2.4.19 already, may be you are just downloading patches from the wrong dir? > Since Cyrus mmap()s files which it also opens directly, is this an > important patch? Any others of these 2.5 patches? Are they backported to It is importnt, but is included already. > 2.4? Other patches are some cosmetic cleanups, also new block allocator, but this block allocator is uncompatible with Chris' data logging patches yet, and you need Chris' patches more. There also this NFS fix I recommended and two not very important fixes that you would probably never ever need. (fixes are patches 13-remount-rw-fix.diff and 04-item_alignment_fix.diff) Bye, Oleg