From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH] don't export ext3_fs.h and jbd.h Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 00:37:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20080326233713.GA15027@lst.de> References: <20080326224622.GA12273@lst.de> <20080326233038.GE7202@mit.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Christoph Hellwig , akpm@osdl.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org To: Theodore Tso Return-path: Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.210]:38292 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752792AbYCZXhr (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Mar 2008 19:37:47 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080326233038.GE7202@mit.edu> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 07:30:38PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:46:22PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > either of the headers actually compiles when included from userpsace > > nor should it be made available as userspace tools should be using > > the libraries or at least headers from e2fsprogs. > > I was planning on simply moving ext3_fs.h to fs/ext3, per your > previously submitted patches. > > I agree that removing jbd.h from the exported list makes sense. Let's get it out of the exported headers list for .25 so people can't accidentally include it anymore and do the big reshuffle for .26, ok?