Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:20:09 +0100 | From | Andi Kleen <> | Subject | Re: A modest proposal -- We need a patch penguin |
| |
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 11:08:52PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > In article <p73aduwddni.fsf@oldwotan.suse.de> you wrote: > > "Most times". For example the EA patches have badly failed so far, just because > > Linus ignored all patches to add sys call numbers for a repeatedly discussed > > and stable API and nobody else can add syscall numbers on i386. > > There still seems to be a lot of discussion vs EAs and ACLs.
At least the last l-k discussion ended in relative conclusion as far as I remember (only disagreement was from someone wanting to implement them in sys_reiser4)
> Setting the suboptimal XFS APIs in stone doesn't make the discussion > easier.
The presented APIs were not the XFS APIs, but a significantly revised version, based on a mix of ext2-acl and XFS and some new changes.
See http://acl.bestbits.at/man/extattr.2.html and http://acl.bestbits.at/man/extattr.5.html
If you think anything is badly "suboptimal" proposal you should have stated your criticism.
-Andi
- 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/
| |