Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)
On Miércoles, 26 de Enero de 2011 11:13:20 Erik Logtenberg escribió: > Diego, pls don't read anything negative in my comments, I enjoy and > respect your work very much! If you could find time to add those latest > changes to the wiki, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your suggestion, I've updated the Changelog and removed the old items from the news section. 2.6.36 didn't had many btrfs changes, there was no new features. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)
On 01/21/2011 03:32 PM, Diego Calleja wrote: > On Viernes, 21 de Enero de 2011 10:54:00 Helmut Hullen escribió: > >> And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine >> too. > > Check the wiki, I keep that updated: > https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page#News I like the Changelog on the wiki [1] very much, since it shows the most important changes in easily understandable language. Unfortunately, the most recent change is 2.6.35 (august 2010), while we are currently at 2.6.37 (stable) and 2.6.38-rc2 (mainline). Especially 2.6.38(-rc2) contains many interesting new btrfs features and lots of important fixes. It would be very nice if the Changelog could list/explain those. [1] https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Changelog The News [2] section on the Main page does mention one more version, 2.6.37. But the news section is less elaborate than the Changelog and also I notice that 2.6.36 is not mentioned in the News section. Still, 2.6.36 does contain all kinds of btrfs-related changes. [2] https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page#News Diego, pls don't read anything negative in my comments, I enjoy and respect your work very much! If you could find time to add those latest changes to the wiki, it would be greatly appreciated. Kind regards, Erik. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)
On Viernes, 21 de Enero de 2011 10:54:00 Helmut Hullen escribió: > And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine > too. Check the wiki, I keep that updated: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page#News -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: version (was: btrfs, broken design?)
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 10:54:00AM +0100, Helmut Hullen wrote: > Hallo, Chris, > > Du meintest am 20.01.11: > > >> Is there a planned date for the final release of btrfs? > > > A final release? We'll keep improving things for a long time. The > > biggest missing feature today is btrfsck, which I'm working on full > > time right now. > > Could it be possible to tell somewhere the actual version? > > Sometimes I download via git, > > > > and I never have found which version that is; "version.sh" tells > something wrong. $ git log then look at the revision ID of the top commit -- that's the closest thing to a version number we've got. When you build from the git repository, the version number that the tools report will be something like 0.19-36-g70c6c10. This means that it's 36 commits on from the version tagged as 0.19, and the last commit was g70c6c10. (This is for the userspace tools, of course -- the kernel has a similar numbering scheme, if you're not building from Linus's tagged versions). > And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine > too. $ git log :) Hugo. -- === Hugo Mills: hugo@... carfax.org.uk | darksatanic.net | lug.org.uk === PGP key: 515C238D from wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net or http://www.carfax.org.uk --- He's playing Schubert. I think Schubert is losing. --- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
version (was: btrfs, broken design?)
Hallo, Chris, Du meintest am 20.01.11: >> Is there a planned date for the final release of btrfs? > A final release? We'll keep improving things for a long time. The > biggest missing feature today is btrfsck, which I'm working on full > time right now. Could it be possible to tell somewhere the actual version? Sometimes I download via git, and I never have found which version that is; "version.sh" tells something wrong. And I never have seen somethin like "Changelog" - that would be fine too. Viele Gruesse! Helmut -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
