[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: New shmfs and Debian

** On Apr 04, Herbert Xu scribbled:
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2000 at 02:41:05PM +0200, Grendel wrote:
> > ** On Apr 04, Herbert Xu scribbled:
> > > 
> > > This has nothing to do with potato, regardless of when 2.4 is released and
> > > packaged.
> >
> > On the contrary, it has much to do with potato - regardless of when/if 2.4
> > is released/packaged. If potato comes out without support for that file
> > system then you'll soon have several dozens of bug reports that "potato
> > doesn't work with 2.4.x. The System V IPC doesn't work on Debian/potato, but
> > it does on RedHat 6.45". I don't want to start another endless discussion -
> > it's a simple issue, doesn't hurt anyone, doesn't bother anyone, it won't
> > affect the potato release cycle, etc. etc.
> We should not do it because this issue has NOT been settled.  It is by no
> means certain that it will be /var/shm, or even that it is needed at all.
It's still in pre4-3, and it doesn't seem to be going out of the game - as
it is now, and as you probably have seen on the debian-devel, some people
_already_ have had problems with potato not having a clue about shmfs.

> This plus the fact that we're late in the game for potato means that nothing
> like this should be done.
But tell me, how in the world will adding one single line to /etc/fstab slow
the potato release cycle??


Attachment: pgptenodGOm56.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: