Messages in this thread | | | From | Daniel Phillips <> | Subject | Re: [2.6] Most likely to be merged by Halloween... THE LIST | Date | Mon, 22 Jul 2002 18:45:00 +0200 |
| |
On Monday 22 July 2002 18:57, Alan Cox wrote: > On Mon, 2002-07-22 at 16:22, Daniel Phillips wrote:developed equivalent > > Supposing both device-mapper and (the kernel part of) EVMS get into the tree, > > there's nothing stopping you from submitting a patch to make EVMS use > > device-mapper. If there's already equivalent code in EVMS, that just makes > > the job easier. > > So we end up with twice as much code to debug and lots of > incompatibilities when people want to switch around.
If that were a problem, Linux would only have one filesystem.
> It would be far > better if the two sets of userspace code could at least agree on a > common kernel interface
Oh, absolutely.
> > I'm firmly in the 'we need both' camp. > > If there is something important in only one then that matters. If there > are important features in each that are not in the other then that > really proves they should merge the projects
I dunno about that. There's more of interest in a subsystem than just what features it has. Relying only on what I've seen in this thread, it would seem natural for EVMS to depend on device-mapper - but why is it necessary to force the issue immediately, beyond hashing out a suitable interface?
-- Daniel - 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/
| |