Hello,
I would like to split-off parts of vfs_subr.c into vfs_node.c * and
vfs_mount.c modules. Decomposing should hopefully bring some better
abstraction, as well as make it easier to work with VFS subsystem.
Any objections?
--
Mindaugas
Hi,
On Julio's request I was looking at the now-failing tests and resulting
hanging processes. Basically at least on i386 the failures are a
result of fork() + setcontext() (plus some voodoo) after which calling
pthread_mutex_lock() with signals masked causes a busyloop due to
pthread__self() cau
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 03:21:22PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> > be supported.
>
> of course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code calling the
> legacy quotactl. If we're going to change it to not check
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 05:41:52PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
> > | >
> > | > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> > | > fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
> > |
> >
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:19:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> | > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent t
On Mar 22, 1:10pm, dholland-t...@netbsd.org (David Holland) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
| On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
| > > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
| >
| > no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file spec
I almost forgot my annual contribution to this thread (actually missed
it last year, sorry 'bout that).
On Fri Oct 16 2009 at 05:36:40 +0300, Antti Kantee wrote:
> On Thu Nov 27 2008 at 20:32:15 +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
> > Good news everyone!
> >
> > I've made the kernel nfs service (nfsd) run
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 10:34:28AM +, Stephen Borrill wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Christoph Egger wrote:
> [snip]
> >I'm also interested in how to use qcow images
> >to run qemu / xen guests.
>
> That's probably more jmcneill's libvdisk stuff which uses pud(4) so that
> a userland process c
Hi,
Good questions, but no. Since the confusion is common, I'll try to
provide some clarity. I'll answer your questions in reverse order,
since it leads to a more logical progression.
On Tue Mar 22 2011 at 06:46:49 +0100, Christoph Egger wrote:
> > For what rump is, does, and how to use it, see
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 01:10:46PM +, David Holland wrote:
> [...
>
> That's a bug, or more accurately legacy behavior that doesn't need to
> be supported.
of course it's not nice. But we're talking about existing code calling the
legacy quotactl. If we're going to change it to not check the
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:21:26PM +0100, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> > (also, edquota and repquota seem fs-independent to me...)
>
> no, they're not: they can directly the quota1 file specified in the
> fstab if quotactl fails or the filesystem is not mounted.
That's a bug, or more accurately leg
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Christoph Egger wrote:
[snip]
I'm also interested in how to use qcow images
to run qemu / xen guests.
That's probably more jmcneill's libvdisk stuff which uses pud(4) so that
a userland process can be used to manage a block device, e.g. a process
that understands .vhd fil
12 matches
Mail list logo
