lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/10] autofs4 - rename autofs4 to autofs
31.08.2013 15:42, Ian Kent wrote:
[...]
> By leaving a Kconfig and Makefile in fs/autofs4 (to build autofs4.ko)
> with a deprication message sub-system maintainers and other users will
> make any needed changes before these are removed after two kernel versions.
> IMHO the presence of the warning is reason enough to leave a build stub
> rather than do a straight out rename.

Why do you want to continue building autofs4.ko? (or allowing to)
What's actually wrong with a stright rename?
If the new module can be auto-loaded by both name (by providing an
alias), there's no need to keep ability to build autofs4.ko, I think.

Well, maybe except of the case when autofs is needed in initramfs (like
for systemd). For this, indeed, you can keep autofs4.ko which is a
dummy depending on autofs.ko...

> Ian Kent (10):
> autofs4 - coding style fixes
> autofs4 - fix string.h include in auto_dev-ioctl.h
> autofs4 - move linux/auto_dev-ioctl.h to uapi/linux
> autofs - merge auto_fs.h and auto_fs4.h
> autofs - use autofs instead of autofs4 everywhere
> autofs - copy autofs4 to autofs
> autofs - create autofs Kconfig and Makefile
> autofs - update fs/autofs4/Kconfig
> autofs - update fs/autofs4/Makefile
> autofs - delete fs/autofs4

By doing it this way, you're losing all git history.
If you perform stright rename and git detects it, you
can use, eg, git log --follow to see whole hostory
across rename. This way you create new files without
history.

So I strongly shuggest actually renaming the subdirectory
(together with appropriate kconfig/makefile changes so
things are bisectable), and creating the stubs after this.

Thanks,

/mjt


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-09-03 14:01    [W:0.072 / U:0.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site