Re: CONFIG_VFAT_FS_DUALNAMES regressions

[David Newall]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> If someone really wants a patch to corrupt their filesystems they know
> where to find it.
>   

No need for pettiness. Andrew's already intimated that he's still
working the patch, and he's a very clever lad and knows if it corrupts
it needs more work.

What I don't understand is how anybody could be satisfied with the
status quo. We cannot leave vfat unchanged, for that will perpetuate a
pool of victims to be sued, and Linux loses credibility every time that
happens. Something *must* change.

What is especially attractive about Andrew's position (he said this more
eloquently than me) is that developing a solution to avoid the patent
will impact Microsoft revenues; and that will be most instructive to
them. That's almost sufficient reason by itself!
--
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/