On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 03:22:18PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> On Mar 21, 5:25pm, bou...@antioche.eu.org (Manuel Bouyer) wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: libquota proposal
>
> | > We should get rid of quota1 and this direct support.
> |
> | maybe, but after 6.0.
>
> But then are you going to go back and change quota2->quota?
This is independant.
> And if yes, why not now?
we need quota1 up to 6.0 (inclusive) for transition. But we can rename
quota -> quota1 or oquota and quota2 -> quota now. I've already
done so in libquota to avoid an ABI change later; the kernel option can
be done after libquota has been commited (this is independant); the header
merge can be done once quota1 has been removed as there should not be
public consumers any more.
--
Manuel Bouyer <bou...@antioche.eu.org>
NetBSD: 26 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--
