Re: Kernel patch request for AFS

[Arjan van de Ven <arjan fenrus demon nl>]

On Mon, 2006-03-13 at 15:19 -0500, Monty wrote:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 01:37:32PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 03:20:47PM +0000, William John Murray wrote:
> >  >    Hello Dave J et al.,
> >  >        Late in the day, I would like to request a kernel patch.
> >  > The following patch:
> >  > 
> >  > http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0602.2/0936.html
> >  > 
> >  >  would allow the AFS filesystem to be supported on FC5 
> >  > For us AFS-dependent users this would be a major plus.
> > 
> > A better fix is for AFS to convert to using the new[1] module parameter syntax.
> > 
> > 		Dave
> > 
> > [1] Where 'new' is what, 3 years old now?
> 
> You assume the poor user has control over what AFS code he gets to deploy. 
> 
> But more to the point, the patch I see is a bugfix... if a mechanism
> doesn't work and no one one wants to fix it, why the hell is it there
> anyway? 

because it's going away! And very soon. It's already a NOP. And Rusty
sent a patch to kill it off for real; that's probably going to make
2.6.17. Its not like this hasn't been coming for the last 3 years as
Dave says; it's like essential for 2.6 kernel modules to actually
function anyway.


> There are reasons the MIT AFS admins are pissed at RedHat, and this
> sort of thing is one of them.  Granted, they start out angry.

Maybe they should bitch at the AFS people instead to make their module
2.6 ready?