>
>
> On Mon, 28 Dec 1998, Steven N. Hirsch wrote:
> >
> > They are not new, and HJ has been trying to get them into the official
> > sources for over three months.
>
> Quite frankly, the rationale is that nobody has stood up and said that
> they are willing to really support the Linux kernel nfsd. I get patches
> from people that I know don't intend to _support_ it, they only re-send
> patches that they have seen floating around, and nobody seems to bother to
> take a real active interest.
I think I understand why you say this, but the collection of fixes Alan
has rolled into 2.1.132-ac3 make the difference between a knfsd that works
and one that doesn't.
> In that kind of situation, I tend to ignore the patches, and unless
> somebody is willing to stand up and say that they'll actually support it
> and do more than just re-send patches that have been on some mailing
> lists, the real 2.2.0 is probably just going to have knfsd be marked
> experimental.
Marking it experimental is a good idea. No arguments. I suspect the
reason that no one has come forth to support the kernel-based server is
that it touches a large number of specialized subsystems. Most of us
mortals are just barely catching up with the myriad of low-level changes
between 2.0 and 2.2 <g>. It would seem to require a superhuman hacker,
perhaps an Alan Cox / Bill Hawes hybrid?
Though I have dug out and fixed two minor problems in the past year,
the majority of the kernel nfs code is beyond my meager abilities.
Steve
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/