Re: [PATCH] fs: Restore files_lock and set_fs_root exports

[Antonio Vargas <windenntw@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 09:15:42 +0000, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 10:00:14AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > so my strong position is that even asking for any 'warning period' for
> > changes in VFS internals (including exports/unexports) would be
> > extremely rude. It would be rude not only towards the authors and
> > maintainers of mainline VFS code, but also towards other external
> > trees/drivers who do _not_ ask for any special status and accept the
> > deal: "follow internals, notice kernel people if they do bad stuff
> > (extremely rare in my case) and fix/redesign stuff if the external tree
> > is broken (much more common)".
> 
> <sarcasm>
> <osdl-salespitch>
> Unfortunately you don't have the financial and political powers IBM
> has, so your opinion doesn't matter as much.  Maybe you should become
> OSDL member to influence the direction of Linux development.
> </osdl-salespitch>
> </sarcasm>
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

If a filesystem is binary-only, then it should get the same treatment
as other binary-only things like graphic drivers and
machine-virtualization drivers: either stay on a designated kernel
version or else fix your driver so it work with mainline.

-- 
Greetz, Antonio Vargas aka winden of network

http://wind.codepixel.com/

Las cosas no son lo que parecen, excepto cuando parecen lo que si son.