Re: (v9fs) -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

2005-07-14 Thread Eric Van Hensbergen
On 7/14/05, Alexey Dobriyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Friday 15 July 2005 00:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > normally we prefer a patch per actual change, not per file so the > > description fits. Given that all these are pretty trivial fixes one > > patch would have done it aswell, though.

Re: (v9fs) -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

2005-07-14 Thread Alexey Dobriyan
On Friday 15 July 2005 00:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > normally we prefer a patch per actual change, not per file so the > description fits. Given that all these are pretty trivial fixes one > patch would have done it aswell, though. > > With these changes the code is fine for mainline in my op

Re: (v9fs) -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

2005-07-14 Thread Christoph Hellwig
On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 01:23:24PM -0500, Eric Van Hensbergen wrote: > Sorry I didn't get to these quicker - was on vacation and basically > off-line for the past week and a half. I've made 90% of the changes > suggested and committed them to my git tree, I'll combine the changes > into a single p

Re: (v9fs) -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status

2005-07-13 Thread Eric Van Hensbergen
On 6/27/05, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That beeing said there's a few issues with the code still I'd like to > see fixed: > Sorry I didn't get to these quicker - was on vacation and basically off-line for the past week and a half. I've made 90% of the changes suggested and