Messages in this thread | | | From | (bill davidsen) | Subject | Re: XFS for 2.4 | Date | 3 Dec 2003 20:12:33 GMT |
| |
In article <1070410409.3fcd2aa9c0d42@horde.sandall.us>, Eric Sandall <eric@sandall.us> wrote: | Quoting Tomas Szepe <szepe@pinerecords.com>: | > On Dec-02 2003, Tue, 16:01 -0200 | > Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com> wrote: | > | > | > > Its too late for it to be included in 2.4. Use 2.6 or a modified 2.4 tree. | > | > | > A: Looking good, come back later, though. | > B: Ok. | > A: Come back later. | > B: Ok. | > A: Come back later. | > B: Ok. | > A: Come back later. | > B: Ok. | > A: Sorry, you're too late. | > B: W--What? | > A: You heard me. (Also I don't like your shoes.) | > | > | > (Sounds a bit like Monty Python to me, can't help it.) | | You know, that's what I've been thinking this whole time. Almost sounds like | someone has a grudge against XFS (or something/someone related to XFS). | | Just my non-technical opinion.
You mean like someone just doesn't like the style of the code? -- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979. - 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/
| |