[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:0.035 / U:4.264 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site