Well, when I looked through 2.0.x, all F_BROKEN was used for was for
displaying BROKEN in /proc/locks. I can certainly add that behavior
back for 2.2.10, but having gdbm fail was a somewhat more important
problem.
>In which case, surely it is better for the kernel to return an error
>code than to implement the wrong kind of locking?
No. It's better for the kernel to try to keep the published
interfaces working, so that you don't have to replace user code
when you upgrade kernels.
Networking is still broken in 2.2.x, of course (the stupid automatic
route stuff and 0.0.0.0 not working, which breaks dhcp), and ptys no
longer use major 4 (which can be fixed by building with devfs, which
is the correct interface change, so I'm not going to worry about it),
but this patch means that any of my Mastodon systems can have a 2.2
kernel upgrade and not blow up during system startup.
____
david parsons \bi/ a lot of userland breaks, too, but those can be
\/ fixed without poking at kernel interfaces.
-
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/