Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Dec 2003 12:46:56 -0800 | From | "Peter C. Norton" <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4 future |
| |
On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:18:00PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:10:40PM -0800, Peter C. Norton wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:54:54AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 22:36, Peter C. Norton wrote: > > > ` > > > > encouraging the distros to get behind autofs4 (hint hint, redhat, > > > > hint). > > > > > > I suspect you'll have a really hard time finding ANY distro that still > > > wants to actively develop new products on a 2.4 codebase. > > > > Perhaps, but some rather large customers of AS2.1, would like it if > > redhat could deliver the large outstanding automounting features for > > their (mainly sun) environments. Since these environments resist > > change, upgrading a kernel to include a newer autofs4 is more likely > > than upgrading the whole system. > > and putting a feature into 2.4.23 is going to help/change that... how ?
The autofs4 kernel code is already in the mainline kernel and in redhat's AS kernels. However:
1) In the mainline its not complete (no direct mounts) 2) In redhats AS kernels its not supported or complete. A newer version seems to only make sense.
Putting an upgrade to autofs4 in the mainline kernel once its proven would give users the option of having a much more feature-complete and un-broken automounter to use. If its not hurting anything else then why leave broken code in the kernel?
Please correct me if I'm making too big a leap, because I have a thought. It seems that new hardware gets this sort of treatment - new drivers for a NIC, scsi, or FC card will be included in a stable series because with out it some subsystem of a computer "doesn't work" completely. What makes this case different?
-Peter
-- The 5 year plan: In five years we'll make up another plan. Or just re-use this one.
- 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/
| |