lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] putting old-style lock handling back into 2.2.10
Date
In article <linux.kernel.19990706070757.B3797@pcep-jamie.cern.ch>,
Jamie Lokier <lkd@tantalophile.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>david parsons wrote:
>> 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.
>
>You'd rather have gdbm silently corrupt your databases due to bad
>locking? (If that's the case).

Look at the kernel source.

``Broken'', in this case, means ``old''.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.996 / U:0.176 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site