Hello, Eric. On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 06:19:27PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > The biggest and worst issue is the semantics are total unmaintable > garbage and there has never been a single counter argument to that. > > Recursive delete is WRONG. > > Further there was no follow up converstion on the list about this trash > to say you had tested it. Or anything else.
I think you're going over the line. You were cc'd on all patches and all the counter points that I wrote in this thread are repetitions from the previous threads. I don't remember you answering to any of the counter points. > Even the partial recursive delete we currently have has been responsible > for broken users of sysfs so I don't see how adding additional checks is > going to do anything but paper over real bugs in real uses of sysfs. Can you please go into details of what kind of bugs would be introduced by recursive removal? I'd really like to know and be happy to fix any actual issues but you really aren't providing useful enough information. > Will you please remove that garbage from your tree. Eric, chill. -- tejun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
