On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 05:28:57PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 07:19:27PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > Would you accept a patch which causes the deprecated sysfs
> > files/directories to disappear, even if CONFIG_SYS_DEPRECATED is
> > defined, via a boot-time parameter?
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 07:19:27PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:34:45PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok, how then should I advertise this better? What can we do better to
> > help userspace programmers out in this regard?
>
> Would you accept a patch which causes the depre
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 05:28:57PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 07:19:27PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> > Would you accept a patch which causes the deprecated sysfs
> > files/directories to disappear, even if CONFIG_SYS_DEPRECATED is
> > defined, via a boot-time parameter?
On Thu, Sep 27 2007, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Well it's not my call, just seems like a really bad idea to change the
> > > error value. You can't claim full coverage for such testing anyway, it's
> > > one of those things that people will
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 07:19:27PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> Would you accept a patch which causes the deprecated sysfs
> files/directories to disappear, even if CONFIG_SYS_DEPRECATED is
> defined, via a boot-time parameter?
How about a mount option? That way people can test without a reboot:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 06:27:48PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2007, at 17:34:45, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:37:42PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
>>> That fact that sysfs is all laid out in a directory, but for which some
>>> directories/symlinks are OK to use, and some
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:34:45PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> Ok, how then should I advertise this better? What can we do better to
> help userspace programmers out in this regard?
Would you accept a patch which causes the deprecated sysfs
files/directories to disappear, even if CONFIG_SYS_DEPRECATE
On Sep 27, 2007, at 17:34:45, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:37:42PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
That fact that sysfs is all laid out in a directory, but for which
some directories/symlinks are OK to use, and some are NOT OK to
use --- is why I call the sysfs interface "an open pit"
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:37:42PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 10:59:17AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > Come on now, I'm _very_ tired of this kind of discussion. Please go
> > read the documentation on how to _use_ sysfs from userspace in such a
> > way that you can properly a
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 02:37:42PM -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> I'm reminded of Rusty's 2003 OLS Keynote, where he points out that
> what's important is not making an interface easy to use, but _hard_
> _to_ _misuse_. That fact that sysfs is all laid out in a directory,
> but for which some direct
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 10:59:17AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> Come on now, I'm _very_ tired of this kind of discussion. Please go
> read the documentation on how to _use_ sysfs from userspace in such a
> way that you can properly access these data structures so that no
> breakage occurs.
I've read i
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 10:23:43AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:59:02 -0400 Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > There are real things to worry about - sysfs, sysfs, sysfs, ... and all
> > > the other
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 11:59:02 -0400 Theodore Tso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Well it's not my call, just seems like a really bad idea to change the
> > > error value. You can't claim full coverage for such testing anyway, it's
> > > o
On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 04:19:12PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Well it's not my call, just seems like a really bad idea to change the
> > error value. You can't claim full coverage for such testing anyway, it's
> > one of those things that people will complain about two releases later
> > saying it
> Well it's not my call, just seems like a really bad idea to change the
> error value. You can't claim full coverage for such testing anyway, it's
> one of those things that people will complain about two releases later
> saying it broke app foo.
Strange since we've spent years changing error val
On Thu, Sep 27 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Its a change of a specific error return from the wrong error to the right
> > > one, nothing more. Fixing the returned error gives us correct behaviour
> > > according to the standards and other systems.
> >
> > It may still break applications. Waving som
> > Its a change of a specific error return from the wrong error to the right
> > one, nothing more. Fixing the returned error gives us correct behaviour
> > according to the standards and other systems.
>
> It may still break applications. Waving some standard at them if they
> complain is unlike
On Thu, Sep 27 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 07:01:18 -0700
> Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:29:19 +0100
> > Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The early LFS work that Linux uses favours EFBIG in various places.
> > > SuSv3 specif
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 07:01:18 -0700
Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:29:19 +0100
> Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The early LFS work that Linux uses favours EFBIG in various places.
> > SuSv3 specifically uses EOVERFLOW for this as noted by Michael (B
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 14:29:19 +0100
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The early LFS work that Linux uses favours EFBIG in various places.
> SuSv3 specifically uses EOVERFLOW for this as noted by Michael (Bug
> 7253)
isn't this an ABI change?
What's the gain for doing this ABI change?
-
To uns
The early LFS work that Linux uses favours EFBIG in various places. SuSv3
specifically uses EOVERFLOW for this as noted by Michael (Bug 7253)
--
[EOVERFLOW]
The named file is a regular file and the size of the file cannot be
represented correctly in an object of type off_t. We should therefor
21 matches
Mail list logo
