Avuton Olrich wrote:
On 3/15/06, Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Avuton Olrich wrote:
I just saw a thread on the LKML a minute ago asking about the state of
getting the patch into vanilla linux. I read Andrew Morton's post
about a month ago stating that it could happen soon, but
On 10:29 Wed 15 Mar , Hans Reiser wrote:
Tell the mosix guys we would be willing to cooperate with them regarding
their problem.
If it was that easy... The problem for openMosix is that most devices
fetch data in 4k blocks via copy_from_user(). For migrated processes,
openMosix intercepts
Jonathan Briggs wrote:
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 23:14 -0800, Hans Reiser wrote:
[snip]
They claim that if we don't use the ext3 code
in our fs then they will be forced to shoulder an extra burden to
maintain our code. We are not allowed to specify that they should not
maintain our code at all.
On Mar 15, 2006 20:27 +0100, Andreas Sch�fer wrote:
If it was that easy... The problem for openMosix is that most devices
fetch data in 4k blocks via copy_from_user(). For migrated processes,
openMosix intercepts these calls and forwards them to the node which
currently hosts the process.
On 12:43 Wed 15 Mar , Hans Reiser wrote:
I am the reiserfs/reiser4 sub-maintainer. So, if reiser4 works well,
and is faster than any other Linux FS, and it is, maintaining it over
time is for me to worry about, not them.
I feel this thread is about to trail off to shores we all know too
Hello,
I just saw a thread on the LKML a minute ago asking about the state of
getting the patch into vanilla linux. I read Andrew Morton's post
about a month ago stating that it could happen soon, but was unlikely
due to there not actually being a need for it to go into mainline (no
major distro
Hello
On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 02:41 -0800, Avuton Olrich wrote:
Hello,
I just saw a thread on the LKML a minute ago asking about the state of
getting the patch into vanilla linux. I read Andrew Morton's post
about a month ago stating that it could happen soon, but was unlikely
due to there
Clemens Eisserer wrote:
AFAIK, the most recent reason why reiser4 does not get included is that
reiser4 developers have to change reiser4 to use generic code to
implement read/write.
AFAICS, reiser4 developers do not work on that.
Has this really become a reason to not include reiser4 into
