Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:11:58 +0200 From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> To: "Jan Mikkelsen" <janm@transactionware.com> Cc: ozawa@ongs.co.jp, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, 'Daichi GOTO' <daichi@freebsd.org>, freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, "'Mars G. Miro'" <marsgmiro@gmail.com> Subject: Re: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010) Message-ID: <E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> In-Reply-To: Message from "Jan Mikkelsen" <janm@transactionware.com> of "Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:47:38 %2B1100." <001201c648bd$226b6440$0301a8c0@transactionware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Daichi GOTO wrote: > > All folks have interests in improved unionfs should keep attentions > > and ask "how about merge?" at every turn :) > > OK. How about a merge? > > I'd really like to see this in 6-STABLE. > > Regards, > > Jan Mikkelsen. just a 'me too'. I've been running with the patch(under 6.1) and it's definitely better than the panics with the unpatched version. in other words, IMHO, it does not break anything, and it actualy fixes somethings. danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl>