[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [linux-lvm] LVM 1.0 release decision



In article <wxxoft055j0 fsf fjorir ifi uio no>, Terje Kvernes <terjekv math uio no> wrote:
>   this reminds me of XFS to be honest -- and that annoys me a great
>   deal. I want to test XFS, but currently I can't. because after LVM
>   and ReiserFS are patched (they pull rank :), the XFS-patches botch
>   badly. and they're far from in sync with current kernels.

That seems to depend. I recently patched 2.4.2-SuSE (not famous for being a
vanilla kernel, and containing LVM and Reiserfs) with the 2.4.2 XFS patch,
and just got 1 reject in a Makefile which I could safely ignore because the
SuSE kernel already contained that patch. And guess what: XFS and Reiserfs
work nicely together with LVM on the same machine!

-- 
Harald Milz           |     hm linux-magazin de     | All generalizations
Linux Magazin         | phone  +49 (0) 89 993411-20 | are shit!
Stefan-George-Ring 24 | fax    +49 (0) 89 993411-99 | 
D-81929 Muenchen      | http://www.linux-magazin.de | 


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]