Re: 2.6.12-rc4-mm[12] - ULOG problem

[Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 983 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-05-19 at 11:48 -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: James Morris <jmorris@redhat.com>
> Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 09:19:33 -0400 (EDT)
> 
> > On Thu, 19 May 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > 
> > > We should remove the feature.  If there is demonstrated need for multiple
> > > instances then it should be done by more conventional means - syscall,
> > > allocation of a device major then use the minor as a selector or whatever.
> > 
> > I'd suggest removing the connector code completely.
> 
> I totally agree, it's crap at the current time and the author doesn't
> fix the problems being shown in it, in fact he defends some of them
> even this one.  It needs lots of work still.

There were no problems reported.
Completely.

What I defend is ability to function correctly when some changes 
may be introduced by providing some extensions that may be used.

-- 
        Evgeniy Polyakov

Crash is better than data corruption -- Arthur Grabowski

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]