On Tuesday 26 February 2002 12:15 pm, Anthony Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 06:25:05PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 01:18:18AM +0800, Anthony Liu wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > Can someone please put back the version number in super.c:
> > >
> > > printk("JFS development version: $Name: $\n");
> > >
> > > Or may be define the value somewhere?
> >
> > How about dropping that line entirely?
I should probably drop it entirely. I should have pulled it out when
submitting the patch to Alan. People who apply the patch generally
know what version they have.
By the way, I accidentally built the patch from a cvs checkout tree
rather than a clean export this last drop, which is why the keyword was
not expanded. The tree was up to date, so nothing else was wrong with
the patch.
>
> I guess the version number shouldn't be an issue.
> Are there any side effect when using a newer version of
> jfsutils than the jfs version in kernel?
No, there is are no dependencies between the versions of the utilities
and of the kernel patches. We release them together entirely for
convenience.
Thanks,
Dave
_______________________________________________
Jfs-discussion mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/oss/mailman/listinfo/jfs-discussion
