David Masover wrote:
Some people don't care about speed but need space. I'd leave them in on
general principle, even if no one wants them now.
Software design is usually improved by identifying features that aren't
worth much, and removing them from the interface and burying them where
average u
>| Stupid question, why have small keys at all?
>|
>| Someone said once that he didn't want to use large keys because they added
>| no value to him and small keys wasted less space. If there are people like
>| this around, burying it is not cool, but if there aren't, maybe small keys
>| should be r
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
| Hans Reiser wrote:
|
|
|>Please make large keys the default, and hide the ability to
|>choose small keys by taking it out of the configuration menu and burying
|>it in a .h file.
|
|
| Stupid question, why have small keys at al
Hi again,
Here is Otis Lindsay I wite you to confirm that we are accepting your mortgage
application.
Our office confirms you can get a $360.000 loan for a $352.00 per month payment.
Approval process will take 1 minute, so please fill out the form on our website:
http://chartreuse.i-refi.net/s6/
Hilzinger Marcel wrote:
Too late, perhaps... SuSE Linux 9.2 will contain reiser4 (at least the
beta testversions did). It cannot be set up via YaST during installation,
which makes its user base pretty small. 9.3 is where we will probably
get a lot of users. Probably more bugs will get found by
>> SuSE Linux 9.2 will contain reiser4
>
>hm. Nobody ever tells me anything. Does that mean that
>SuSE are using 8k stacks?
Yes, the defconfig does not have 4K stacks enabled.
(And I stick to that when I use the kernel-source.i586.rpm)
Jan Engelhardt
--
Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftliche Dat
"Hilzinger Marcel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> SuSE Linux 9.2 will contain reiser4
hm. Nobody ever tells me anything. Does that mean that
SuSE are using 8k stacks?
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>>
>> - reiser4: not sure, really. The namespace extensions were disabled,
>>although all the code for that is still present. Linus's filesystem
>>criterion used to be "once lots of people are using it, preferably
>> when
>>vendors are shipping it". That's a
Hans Reiser wrote:
>Please make large keys the default, and hide the ability to
>choose small keys by taking it out of the configuration menu and burying
>it in a .h file.
Stupid question, why have small keys at all?
Someone said once that he didn't want to use large keys because they added
no
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
Sorry if this is common knowledge but how do you go about making a request for a
feature in the kernel?
brian
Look for a thread on the linux-kernel mailing list titled:
Re: 2.6.9-mm1
and join that thread which discusses reiser4 with comments suggesting
reiser4
Christian Mayrhuber wrote:
On Friday 22 October 2004 19:38, Spam wrote:
Hello,
I was interested in testing the repacker statistics tool that Piotr
Neuman wrote (and others later added to). But from what I can see
the repacker is disabled in 2.6.9-rc4-mm1, because of this patch:
htt
Quoting Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Just because we are the fastest filesystem does not mean that it will be
> easy for us to get in. Actually, it makes it harder to get in, for
> reasons I'd prefer not to state. This week would be a good time to ask
> for reiser4 to be merged in as an ex
Just because we are the fastest filesystem does not mean that it will be
easy for us to get in. Actually, it makes it harder to get in, for
reasons I'd prefer not to state. This week would be a good time to ask
for reiser4 to be merged in as an experimental fs if you want it.
http://dficeghl.bestforhim.info/?abjkmxwvnydfizctceghl
On Friday 22 October 2004 19:38, Spam wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I was interested in testing the repacker statistics tool that Piotr
> Neuman wrote (and others later added to). But from what I can see
> the repacker is disabled in 2.6.9-rc4-mm1, because of this patch:
>
>
http://kernel.
15 matches
Mail list logo
