From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264386AbTLBUrH (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:47:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264388AbTLBUrG (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:47:06 -0500 Received: from lenin.net ([192.31.21.154]:14260 "HELO lenin.nu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S264386AbTLBUq6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 15:46:58 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:46:56 -0800 From: "Peter C. Norton" To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Ian Kent , Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 future Message-ID: <20031202204656.GZ18176@lenin.nu> References: <20031201153316.B3879@infradead.org> <20031201213651.GK18176@lenin.nu> <1070322894.5260.5.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20031202201040.GX18176@lenin.nu> <20031202201800.GB2030@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031202201800.GB2030@devserv.devel.redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:18:00PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:10:40PM -0800, Peter C. Norton wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:54:54AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 22:36, Peter C. Norton wrote: > > > ` > > > > encouraging the distros to get behind autofs4 (hint hint, redhat, > > > > hint). > > > > > > I suspect you'll have a really hard time finding ANY distro that still > > > wants to actively develop new products on a 2.4 codebase. > > > > Perhaps, but some rather large customers of AS2.1, would like it if > > redhat could deliver the large outstanding automounting features for > > their (mainly sun) environments. Since these environments resist > > change, upgrading a kernel to include a newer autofs4 is more likely > > than upgrading the whole system. > > and putting a feature into 2.4.23 is going to help/change that... how ? The autofs4 kernel code is already in the mainline kernel and in redhat's AS kernels. However: 1) In the mainline its not complete (no direct mounts) 2) In redhats AS kernels its not supported or complete. A newer version seems to only make sense. Putting an upgrade to autofs4 in the mainline kernel once its proven would give users the option of having a much more feature-complete and un-broken automounter to use. If its not hurting anything else then why leave broken code in the kernel? Please correct me if I'm making too big a leap, because I have a thought. It seems that new hardware gets this sort of treatment - new drivers for a NIC, scsi, or FC card will be included in a stable series because with out it some subsystem of a computer "doesn't work" completely. What makes this case different? -Peter -- The 5 year plan: In five years we'll make up another plan. Or just re-use this one.