On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > But now that you did two-thirds of the job I take it you'll > also do the third part? It is again precisely the same stuff. Are you talking about isofs_lookup_grandparent()? The code is now dead, and has been for a long time actually (as the VFS layer keeps track of ".." for us these days). Removed. I'll look at the isofs_read_level3_size() thing. At least that one doesn't have the name translation crap in it. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4... Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Harald Koenig
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- test11-pre7 compile failure J Sloan
- Re: test11-pre7 compile failure Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Keith Owens
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Linus Torvalds
- Re: BUG: isofs broken (2.2 and 2.4) Andries . Brouwer