> > > 4. FAT. 2.3.7 does not compile with FAT file system. Excuse me?
> > Details? Details are the difference between a rant and something
> > helpful, useful, and constructive.
> It does not compile.
> Details won't help you, since even if I gave you details you would still
> need to verify them and try to compile it yourself and then you would
If some people actually put some attention on linux-kernel they would
notice that "someone" already said that:
1. fs changes temporarily broke them all
2. some fs have been updated (ext2)
3. the ones that are broken, instead of silently corrupting your
partition, on purpose don't compile.
> Sorry, but if the second most frequently used file system does not
> compile, then don't release it. I am not counting the pseudo file
> systems proc and pts here, obviously.
If it is visibily broken, someone will come and fix it. If an ugly temp
hack is placed until someone fixes it, nobody ever will.
> People like me who complain. And if there is just _one_ goof like the
> FAT problem, there are literally thousands of people who will run into
> this problem and be discouraged to upgrade their kernel in the future.
They are discouraged because FAT doesn't compile, but they aren't
discouraged when Linus says that that kernel still might have fs corruption
bugs? ... "doesn't compute! doesn't compute!"
-- ____/| Ragnar Højland Freedom - Linux - OpenGL Fingerprint 94C4B \ o.O| 2F0D27DE025BE2302C =(_)= "Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for 104B78C56 B72F0822 U chaos and madness await thee at its end." hkp://keys.pgp.com- 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/