> > I think with the growing acceptance of ReiserFS in the Linux
> > community, it is tiresome to have to apply a patch again and again
> > just to get working NFS. 2.2 NFS horrors all over again.
> The zero copy patches were basically self contained and tested for 6 months.
> The reiserfs NFS hacks are ugly as hell and dont belong in the base kernel.
> There is a difference.
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Are you referring to Neil Brown's nfs operations patch as being as ugly as
hell, or something else? Just want to understand what you are saying before
NFS is ugly as hell, and we just try to conform to whatever is the latest trend
expected to be accepted since I really don't care so long as it works and
doesn't uglify ReiserFS more than necessary. If you have another approach, one
that is less ugly, please let us know. This is the first I have heard someone
complain, I thought his patch was liked by Linus architecturally and that it
would be going in sometime real soon now (which is why we coded for it). Can
you articulate why you dislike it in more detail?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/