On January 7, 2002 10:27 pm, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > On January 7, 2002 03:13 pm, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > > Of course fs which are not adapted would still just work with the fs_i()
> > > and fs_sb() macros and/or using two separate pointers.
> >
> > Yes, the fs_* macros are the really critical part of all this. I'd like to
> > get them in early, while we hash out the rest of it. I think Jeff supports
> > me in this, possibly Al as well.
>
> agreed, from my side
OK, are we agreed that:
- We're waiting for Al to merge ext/*alloc.c changes
- When that's done we will apply what would be my unbork patches (2: ext2_i) and
(3: ext2_sb) to both 2.4.current and 2.5.current? Subject to getting these two
patches into the form everybody likes, of course.
- We have some time in the interim to figure out how best to unbork fs.h, but we
all agree it needs to be done soon.
-- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 15 2002 - 21:00:21 EST