Re: [patch 2/4] Configure out file locking features

[J. Bruce Fields]

On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 01:54:01PM -0500, Matt Mackall wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 14:25 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:24:51AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
> > > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 03:52:37PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > > >> Le Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:38:48 -0400,
> > > >> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> a Ãcrit :
> > > >>
> > > >>> Out of curiosity, why does the nfs client need disabling, but not
> > > >>> nfsd, gfs2, fuse, etc.?
> > > >> Then also need disabling.
> > > > 
> > > > OK by me, but again, why exactly?  Since you're replacing the locking
> > > > calls they used by stubs that just return errors, in theory nfs, nfsd,
> > > > gfs2, and the rest should still compile and run, just without locking
> > > > support, right?
> > > 
> > > I think so, but haven't tested this myself.
> > > 
> > > However, I would still be inclined to NOT add the extra config
> > > dependencies.  Just my 2 cents.
> > 
> > OK.  My fear was that there was some good reason that the nfs dependency
> > was added in the first place, and that it's since been lost....
> 
> I vaguely remember there was some compile issue here, but that would
> have been back in the 2.6.10 era.

Sounds plausible.  I've got no objection to the patch either way, but if
we could at least just add a comment documenting the issue (if it
exists), that might be helpful.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/