On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 05:39:59PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2003 at 09:51:07AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > [...] > > We use XFS extensively at work, and while it has many nice > > features, I think some time is needed before we can say the > > integration into 2.4 has been successful. I'm actually quite > > surprised to hear the patch no longer touched the VFS by the time > > it was integrated; there were still quite a few things outside of > > fs/xfs being changed by the kernel patch last I looked. Either > > they've done an excellent job of merging the rest of these other > > changes already, or there are as-yet-unapplied patches that some of > > us might miss. ;) > e.g. the ACL support in xfs has not been (and will not be) merged in > mainline 2.4. Ah, so it makes the XFS patchset smaller for 2.4, but an unpatched 2.4 is still pretty much worthless for XFS. :) -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpJ1a3YHSAeA.pgp
Description: PGP signature