[lkml]   [1998]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: ETXTBSY: Read The F. Patch before you comment on it
    Linus Torvalds writes the following:
    >I don't think people really understand what "Codefreeze" is all about.
    >It's not about discussing issues. I agreed with your patch, but that has
    >no relevance at all. The kernel is frozen. The MAP_DENYWRITE kind of thing

    Now there's a response I can live with. It seems like a bug fix to me,
    considering that I managed to trash a few processes by accidentally writing
    to a .so, but whatever you say goes...

    Honestly, I had my eye on 2.0.36, because I'm not brave enough (don't have an
    expendable computer) to be a 2.1.x user. So obviously I was a few levels
    beyond misunderstanding "CodeFreeze" :) Is it possible for an outsider to
    make useful contributions without actually being on the bleeding edge?

    >So please continue to work on the F patch, but if you grow impatient you

    I'll just save it away for later, and adapt it to 2.2.x when that gets here.

    >have only yourself to blame. I certainly agree that there is little reason
    >for all this discussion.

    Well, at least we ended up educating some people on how rename() works.

    There is one thing I keep mentioning, and nobody says anything about it, that
    may still be worthy of being looked at for 2.0.36: Why doesn't arch/sparc/'s
    sys_mmap ignore MAP_DENYWRITE like the others? Will the mmap("/etc/utmp",
    MAP_DENYWRITE) annoyance work on sparc, or is there some other sparc magic
    going on that makes it different?

    Alan Curry

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:44    [W:0.019 / U:0.780 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site