From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Mar 17 15:34:31 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52DE216A41F;
	Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:34:31 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2154543D78;
	Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:34:26 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior.samsco.home [192.168.254.11])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2HFYIrd094696;
	Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:34:18 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from scottl@samsco.org)
Message-ID: <441AD6F7.3020105@samsco.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 08:34:15 -0700
From: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20051230
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jacques Marneweck <jacques@powertrip.co.za>
References: <E1FKB02-0004Kv-Tl@cs1.cs.huji.ac.il>
	<441A819A.5070100@powertrip.co.za>
In-Reply-To: <441A819A.5070100@powertrip.co.za>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed 
	version=3.1.0
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on pooker.samsco.org
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)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:34:31 -0000

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