Re: [Cooker] status of supermount?
borsenkow == Borsenkow Andrej [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I remember having reported some problems in new supermount borsenkow incarnation ... what is the status? Was something fixed in the meantime? -andrej hmm. i believe juan may still be frantically chewing away on rw, but borsenkow ro seems ... eh...well... each will have his own opinions. borsenkow What opinions? I get busy VFS inode, destructing every time I shutdown borsenkow system with supermounted drive. I just say that first version (-18mdk?) borsenkow was way too buggy and it was very easy to block access to your drive borsenkow until reboot (and do not forget total KDE freeze trying to access borsenkow supermounted drive). I have not seen anything supermount-related in borsenkow changelogs so far so I assume it is not fixed. All known/reported bugs are fixed in -26mdk. And there has been fixes in the meanwhile, for the rest, if there was no patch, was because the fix was not ready :( * Sun Sep 23 2001 Juan Quintela [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.4.8-26mdk - new supermount patch, this time fixes the oops. - stat fixes. * Sat Sep 22 2001 Juan Quintela [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.4.8-25mdk - new supermount patch. * Mon Sep 17 2001 Chmouel Boudjnah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.4.8-24mdk - supermount fixes (a lot of them, this time should work). (P306). (juan) * Wed Sep 12 2001 Chmouel Boudjnah [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2.4.8-23mdk - supermount upgrade (P305) (juan) Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
Re: [Cooker] status of supermount?
matthew == Matthew D Pitts [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: matthew Guys, matthew I was planning to start a total re-write of supermount ( when i have the matthew time ) and would like to know what type of features would be desired in it. matthew I will send a list of my plans for Supermount 2 when I get it started. Hi you can contact me if you want about that project, current supermount patches work again (that means that today I fixed the last known bug). I plan to change quite a bit of things now that upermount works (i.e. I can do big changes) and I have time for the next Mandarke release: - Make supermount locking compresible, just now it uses several things to mean the same, making races too easy (in the other way you can think that there is _no_ locking. - Make it works with zips nicely (notice that this means change the zip driver, supermount is good enough as it is, but zips want to _have_ the unit locked while opened :( - try to implement a way to detect if there is a disk in the unit before trying to mount, just now we try to mount the disk to know if there is something in the unit. That is just from the top of my memory in a Sunday night after haven't had too many sleep. Later, Juan. -- In theory, practice and theory are the same, but in practice they are different -- Larry McVoy
RE: [Cooker] status of supermount?
I remember having reported some problems in new supermount incarnation ... what is the status? Was something fixed in the meantime? -andrej hmm. i believe juan may still be frantically chewing away on rw, but ro seems ... eh...well... each will have his own opinions. What opinions? I get busy VFS inode, destructing every time I shutdown system with supermounted drive. I just say that first version (-18mdk?) was way too buggy and it was very easy to block access to your drive until reboot (and do not forget total KDE freeze trying to access supermounted drive). I have not seen anything supermount-related in changelogs so far so I assume it is not fixed. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] status of supermount?
Guys, I was planning to start a total re-write of supermount ( when i have the time ) and would like to know what type of features would be desired in it. I will send a list of my plans for Supermount 2 when I get it started. Matthew D. Pitts - Original Message - From: Borsenkow Andrej [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 1:33 AM Subject: RE: [Cooker] status of supermount? I remember having reported some problems in new supermount incarnation ... what is the status? Was something fixed in the meantime? -andrej hmm. i believe juan may still be frantically chewing away on rw, but ro seems ... eh...well... each will have his own opinions. What opinions? I get busy VFS inode, destructing every time I shutdown system with supermounted drive. I just say that first version (-18mdk?) was way too buggy and it was very easy to block access to your drive until reboot (and do not forget total KDE freeze trying to access supermounted drive). I have not seen anything supermount-related in changelogs so far so I assume it is not fixed. -andrej
Re: [Cooker] status of supermount?
Borsenkow Andrej wrote: I remember having reported some problems in new supermount incarnation ... what is the status? Was something fixed in the meantime? -andrej hmm. i believe juan may still be frantically chewing away on rw, but ro seems ... eh...well... each will have his own opinions.
