> So, having EVMS not included in the kernel was the decision they wanted
> to make?
Not having the kernel part of EVMS doesn't mean EVMS isn't
available to users. EVMS can get a lot of the functionality
using device mapper.
> If not, then I propose you be a little more reasonable and think about
> what this decision does to all the work thus far put into EVMS.
The work put into EVMS this far is maybe 20% of the work that
maintaining EVMS would cost once it's in the kernel.
Developing code is nowhere near as much work as maintaining it
indefinately. Using the device mapper framework makes a lot of
sense from many points of view.
regards,
Rik
-- Bravely reimplemented by the knights who say "NIH". http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Current spamtrap: <a href=mailto:"october@surriel.com">october@surriel.com</a>- 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/