[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification Filesystem
On Sun, Sep 03, 2006 at 07:42:53PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> >> > This set of patches constitutes Unionfs version 2.0. We are presenting it to
> >> > be reviewed and considered for inclusion into the kernel.
> >>
> >> Small nit: is it possible to order these patches so that the kernel
> >> builds at each intermediate point (so we can use git bisect). The
> >> easiest way to achieve this would be to do the Kconfig and Makefile
> >> updates last.
> >
> >Ideally, when Unionfs is commited into git, the whole thing would be one
> >commit - what's the point of having half of a filesystem?
> So that you can eliminate e.g. locking bugs by searching in less code.

I think you misunderstood my comment. What I meant to say was that there is
_no way_ you can compile a filesystem that has only dentry ops but not
superblock ops - this would happen if you tried to bisect and you landed
half way in the series of commits for the filesystem. For the _initial_
commit one cset makes sense. For subsequent fixes one commit per fix is the
only logical thing to do.

Josef "Jeff" Sipek.

Bad pun of the week: The formula 1 control computer suffered from a race

VGER BF report: H 7.95683e-07
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-09-03 21:49    [W:0.121 / U:3.472 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site