[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:0.049 / U:4.552 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site