According to Bill Rugolsky Jr.:
> On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:05:03PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > Right now Im not happy with the nfsv3 stuff I last looked at and
> > it seems to still contain things Linus rejected a while back.
>
> Alan, would you please describe in a few words what items are
> p
Hello Alan (& Others) , How about describing what it breaks ?
I know that invoking the God Linus's name can just get people
to back down . So I ask for myself as well as others ...
what , where , when , why , who .Hth , JimL
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wro
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:05:03PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> People would appreciate lots of things but stability happens to come first.
> Thats why its primarily focussed on driver stuff not on revamping the
> internals. Right now Im not happy with the nfsv3 stuff I last looked at and
> it seems
David Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> attention everyone,
>
> the assumption that people who use raid or nfs always use a patched kernel
> is not true.
>
> in many cases it is not trivial to find the newest patches and tools to go
> with them (documentation limitations) and in other cases the s
On 1 Sep 2000, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Does including knfsd v3 break v2? Is not NFS v3 a compile-time option? I
> would not object if it was tagged "EXPERIMENTAL".
it is. asui the NFS patches are bugfixes/improvements on the existing
stock V2 knfsd, and the feature add v3 is pretty much indepe
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> I'd love to have raid 0.90, nfsv3 and the new ide stuff in but I
> cannot see a path for that without breaking a supposedly stable
> product for other people which is simply not acceptable.
>
raid i can understand considering it's a 'no way back' thing. the
alize there is a reason to upgrade.
David Lang
On 1
Sep 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Date: 1 Sep 2000 12:21:58 GMT
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Linux 2.2.18pre1
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECT
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> People would appreciate lots of things but stability happens to come first.
> Thats why its primarily focussed on driver stuff not on revamping the
> internals. Right now Im not happy with the nfsv3 stuff I last looked at and
> it seems to still contain thi
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The big problem with the raid patches is that there is no way back for your
>raid array, unless somebody adds a noconv modus to raidutils and support into
>the kernel to keep the old super block version. It also requires tools
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Andree) writes:
>Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
>> you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
>> patch of choice.
>Well, I'm asking again, as usual, a
> One day I hope you'll explain to us why this is not 2.2.17pre21...
> Either you are sure pre20 is going to be the official 2.2.17,
> or I'm missing something.
The 2.2.18pre1 changes are higher risk problems to fix. 2.2.17pre20 is extremely
solid. Its probably the most solid 2.2 kernel so far o
On Fri, Sep 01, 2000 at 12:05:03PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
> > > you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
> > > patch of choice.
> >
> > Well, I'm asking again, as usual, are you pla
On Thu, 31 Aug 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
> you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
> patch of choice.
One day I hope you'll explain to us why this is not 2.2.17pre21...
Either you are
> > Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
> > you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
> > patch of choice.
>
> Well, I'm asking again, as usual, are you planning to integrate
> kernel-space NFSv3? I'd appreciate if you did.
Paul Jakma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> will old tools work with kernel+nfs patches? i think the fear and
> main argument against updating NFS in linux 2.2 is that people will
> be forced to update their tools.
You'd need a pretty recent util-linux package (mount in particular) to
actually take
On Fri, 1 Sep 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
> What incompatible tools???
>
> Any nfs-utils that work with vanilla 2.2.16 will work just fine with
> patched 2.2.16. They may not access any new functionality, but there
> ARE NO INCOMPATIBILITIES (that I know of, and I am quute close to the
> game).
>
On Friday September 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> 2: incompatible tools: those who follow a dist are already using
> incompatible tools anyway, and can either stay with their dist or get
> the neccessary tools themselves (nfs-utils is available in RPM and
> deb anyway!). those who follow the st
On 1 Sep 2000, Matthias Andree wrote:
> Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well, I'm asking again, as usual, are you planning to integrate
> kernel-space NFSv3? I'd appreciate if you did.
yes please.
0: The new NFS patches work so so much better than vanilla linux nfs.
1: due to (0) most
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
> you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
> patch of choice.
Well, I'm asking again, as usual, are you planning to integrate
kernel-space NFSv3? I
On Thu, Aug 31, 2000 at 11:54:06PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> o Merge the microcode driver from 2.4 into 2.2(Tigran Aivazian)
Just to let people know: This doesn't compile as it has devfs
stuff left in it. Fix is in the works...
Best regards,
Daniel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send t
Since 2.2.17 isnt out yet I've released 2.2.18pre1 versus 2.2.17pre20. So
you need to grab 2.2.16 then apply the 2.2.17pre20 patch then the 2.2.18pre
patch of choice.
2.2.18pre1 (versus 2.2.17pre20)
o Update symbios/ncr driver to 1.7.0/3.4.0(Gerhard Roudier)
o Updated ATP8
21 matches
Mail list logo
