From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
To: Takashi Sato <sho@tnes.nec.co.jp>
Cc: 'Andrew Morton' <akpm@osdl.org>,
'Andreas Dilger' <adilger@clusterfs.com>,
torvalds@osdl.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/3] Fix problems on multi-TB filesystem and file
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:22:48 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1137619368.8706.42.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000101c61c2e$59230b20$4168010a@bsd.tnes.nec.co.jp>
On Wed, 2006-01-18 at 21:54 +0900, Takashi Sato wrote:
> > CONFIG_LFS would become a specialised option for embedded systems and
> > for the minority of people who self-compile kernels. I just don't
> > think that's worth the maintainability hassle.
>
> I added CONFIG_LSF to use large filesystem over network with >2TB file
> even on a small system as CONFIG_LBD disable. And I heard that some
> people dislike network filesystems depending on block device.
>
> Trond, do you have comments about integrating CONFIG_LFS and
> CONFIG_LBD?
If you do merge CONFIG_LFS and CONFIG_LBD, then please throw out the
name CONFIG_LBD in favour of CONFIG_LFS, since the resulting option will
_not_ be block device specific.
Unless someone has some really good arguments against it, I too would
vote for hiding both options behind CONFIG_EMBEDDED.
Cheers,
Trond
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-01-18 21:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-01-05 10:04 [PATCH 2/3] Fix problems on multi-TB filesystem and file Takashi Sato
2006-01-13 2:33 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-13 13:50 ` Takashi Sato
2006-01-13 20:28 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-13 20:51 ` Andreas Dilger
2006-01-13 21:19 ` Andrew Morton
2006-01-18 12:54 ` Takashi Sato
2006-01-18 21:22 ` Trond Myklebust [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-12-16 13:10 Takashi Sato
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1137619368.8706.42.camel@lade.trondhjem.org \
--to=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sho@tnes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).