Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:30:02 +0200 From: Jacques Marneweck <jacques@powertrip.co.za> To: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> Cc: Jan Mikkelsen <janm@transactionware.com>, 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: <441A819A.5070100@powertrip.co.za> In-Reply-To: <E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> References: <E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Danny Braniss wrote: >> 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 > Any ETA to when we can see this merged into 6.1 and 5.5? Regards --jm -- Jacques Marneweck http://www.powertrip.co.za/blog/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?441A819A.5070100>