Re: Another bcachefs version downgrade bug

["Christopher Snowhill" <chris@kode54.net>]

On Thu Oct 17, 2024 at 9:49 AM PDT, Carl E. Thompson wrote:
>
>
> > On 2024-10-17 3:13 AM PDT Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> > ...
>
> > Carl, I'm happy to fix bugs that you find, but the attitude and the
> > unnecessary advice - that I don't enjoy.
>
> Seriously, Kent? **You're** talking to **me** about attitude?
>
> **You're** giving **me** passive-aggressive attitude about how I'm reporting a bug when using a kernel which is only 4 months old. And how about that crack about about how I should have just done an fsck when you knew (should have known) that a fsck doesn't fix the problem? I don't doubt that in your mind those are subtle insults that would fly right over my head and I wouldn't notice but I might suggest that other people aren't quite the idiots you seem to always assume we are.
>
> I'm trying to **help** you, Kent. And that includes the reminder about how long it takes to put mostly-done software into a usable state. That's not attitude, that's just reality.
>
> Carl

FYI, 6.9 was first released in May, and is already EOL now. In fact, so
is 6.10, at 6.10.14. There are no LTS kernels with bcachefs support yet
at this point. All further development is going into 6.12 now, with bug
fixes being backported into 6.11.

The only distributions still shipping 6.9 or 6.10 are backporting things
themselves. Actually, last I recall, there's at least one distribution
that decided to slap 6.8 into an LTS as well. I guess big distributions
just *love* doing their own backport work.

- Christopher