Andrew Morton wrote:
- cachefs is a bit stuck because it's a ton of complex code and afs is
the only user of it. Wiring it up to NFS would help.
Yes, please! I have an application for CacheFS between an NFS client and
server (all Linux) very soon :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the l
Mikael Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > perfctr has one API update pending, and then the API should be
> > > in it final-ish form. David Gibson at IBM has done a ppc64 port,
> > > which is about ready to be merged, and someone else has just
> > > started working on a mips port.
Andrew Morton writes:
> Mikael Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Andrew Morton writes:
> > > Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
> > >
> > > I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
>
> I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two.
I would certainly vote for FUSE going in. Even if it has some bits that
cou
Mikael Pettersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton writes:
> > Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
> >
> > I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two. That and
> > cpusets are the no
Andrew Morton writes:
> Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
>
> I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two. That and
> cpusets are the notable features which are 2.6.12 candidates.
>
> - crashdum
> > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
> >
> > It's been in -mm for the 2.6.11 cycle, and the same code was released
> > a month ago as FUSE-2.2. So it should have received a fair amount of
> > testing, with no problems found so far.
> >
> > The one originally merged
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 12:31:23PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
>
> I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two. That and
> cpusets are the notable features whic
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 12:31:23PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
>
> I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two. That and
> cpusets are the notable features which are 2
On Wed, Mar 02, 2005 at 07:17:13PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Hi Andrew!
>
> Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
>
> It's been in -mm for the 2.6.11 cycle, and the same code was released
> a month ago as FUSE-2.2. So it should have received a fair amount of
> testi
Miklos Szeredi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
I was planning on sending FUSE into Linus in a week or two. That and
cpusets are the notable features which are 2.6.12 candidates.
- crashdump seems permanently not-quite-ready
- perfctr
Hi Andrew!
Do you have any objections to merging FUSE in mainline kernel?
It's been in -mm for the 2.6.11 cycle, and the same code was released
a month ago as FUSE-2.2. So it should have received a fair amount of
testing, with no problems found so far.
The one originally merged into -mm already
12 matches
Mail list logo
