Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 10 Sep 2010 17:24:40 -0400
From:      jhell <jhell@DataIX.net>
To:        Graham Todd <gtodd@bellanet.org>
Cc:        freebsd-fs@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: ZFS v28 is ready for wider testing.
Message-ID:  <4C8AA218.8090104@DataIX.net>
In-Reply-To: <4C878B9A.2000909@bellanet.org>
References:  <20100831215915.GE1932@garage.freebsd.pl>	<20100902214823.GB2542@garage.freebsd.pl>	<4C811954.5040602@3mail4.co.uk>	<20100903170241.GF1780@garage.freebsd.pl>	<4C8232C6.9020108@DataIX.net> <4C8294B7.3010507@bellanet.org> <20100908090842.GA87388@roberto-al.eurocontrol.fr> <4C878B9A.2000909@bellanet.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/08/2010 09:11, Graham Todd wrote:
> On 09/08/10 05:08, Ollivier Robert wrote:
>> According to Graham Todd:
>>> Thanks to you and other devs for all your careful work integrating ZFS
>>> into FreeBSD. It seems amazing that the patch for v28 *almost* even
>>> applies to 8-STABLE.
>>
>> Do you think you could generate a 8-STABLE patch or at least tell us where 
>> it is failling please?
> 
> thanks to jhell,v - who has already has attempted this and reported back :)

:-)

> 
> see: http://bit.ly/d20tML  and
> 
> lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-September/019576.html
> 
> "only 14 of the 293 files that were changed had rejects against a stable/8
> that was patched to ZFSv15 + metaslab_v2 + abe_stat_rrwlock"
> 
> I was unable to quite that far - I think because I applied the earlier
> patches in the wrong order. But I am impressed that adding a patch from
> CURRENT to go from ZFSv15 to ZFSv28 on the STABLE branch was that close to
> applying.

	Just an update to the above, I was planning on getting to this sooner
but currently have higher ordered tasks to accomplish first.  If I do
happen to get around to it I will put a patchset up somewhere for trial.

	You should be advised that if this does happen and you upgrade your
pool + kernel there is a possibility that 8-STABLE will never see these
changes officially so you will be left to your own demise or to upgrade
to a 9-CURRENT system in order to have a supported source tree with the
zfsv28 patch once that gets in there.

	With the above 'stated', this is why it has not been my highest
priority right now.


Regards,


- -- 

 jhell,v
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (FreeBSD)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMiqIYAAoJEJBXh4mJ2FR+dbwH/2l0tUg0TbJrwxJOhEbZmCez
kviw4TLRugd3EX/c/Gs3PFlJPaN7dK8PFMpdt3P8ule0Vd/5+b0tAzdiwP58p1g9
AcELf1N83hhwunkVPp5OYW7+dUP7ujhz/tGCdZkKVF3VHx+Tmp4oK3PY6p9yXZuO
XZwbSYVq8SeJoZAANbO1/OTQxnCB/N7mCnW4pR09IUnHB4HiYuEuzgkjbWvFbbKR
2yAxLl5JwkKy9maK2E3DVS6icv3DiSGp42s6dp4faSnFbgQrJNpd9LcUbJNiiC0a
r+uVgYvo4Wgj8z354CFnXpEct+LKBtXj04ufhzcyvpSoMKm9L1U3u41FeMEwWsE=
=AZRS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C8AA218.8090104>