Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:34:15 -0700 From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> To: Jacques Marneweck <jacques@powertrip.co.za> 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: <441AD6F7.3020105@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <441A819A.5070100@powertrip.co.za> References: <E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il> <441A819A.5070100@powertrip.co.za>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jacques Marneweck wrote: > 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 > Since it's not in HEAD yet, it's pretty improbable that it'll get into 5.5 and 6.1. It would be nice to get it in for 6.2 though. Scott
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?441AD6F7.3020105>