On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:07:02AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
>> Yeah, not many do, but presumably they'll set it once and forget about
>> it. Once someone straightens them out, they should rarely break.
>>
>> OTOH, the value of defaulting t
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:07:02AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> Yeah, not many do, but presumably they'll set it once and forget about
> it. Once someone straightens them out, they should rarely break.
>
> OTOH, the value of defaulting to "N" is pretty low here. Maybe it
> would just be best to just
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012 15:44:52 +0100
Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:13:17AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> > I agree that we often need cifsFYI debug info in order to troubleshoot
> > problems. The question here though is whether compiling those in ought
> > to be the default.
> >
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 07:13:17AM -0500, Jeff Layton wrote:
> I agree that we often need cifsFYI debug info in order to troubleshoot
> problems. The question here though is whether compiling those in ought
> to be the default.
>
> In generic distro kernels, I think we do want that turned on even i
On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 09:30:33 -0600
Steve French wrote:
> I don't think taking out debugging makes sense - we need debugging a
> lot more often than expected even to diagnose user errors (usually
> relating to session establishment failures, since we are very limited
> in how much information can
I don't think taking out debugging makes sense - we need debugging a
lot more often than expected even to diagnose user errors (usually
relating to session establishment failures, since we are very limited
in how much information can be passed back in mount). If we had
dynamic trace points for ci
6 matches
Mail list logo
