softupdates as mount option?
Matthew Dillon
dillon at apollo.backplane.com
Thu May 27 09:46:28 PDT 2004
:
:-On [20040527 03:42], Matthew Dillon (dillon at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
:> On the otherhand, if I were to prioritize this it would be, well,
:> dead last on my list because there just isn't enough of a benefit
:> in making it a mount option over what we have now, and there is a ton
:> of other work that needs to go into the system (just following the
:> original goals list) that I would rather be working on.
:
:But if someone wants to work on this and presents working patches would you
:include it?
:
:--
:Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
I wouldn't exclude it :-). It would depend on the implementation. There
are some hurdles, such as the fact that our mount flags are still being
passed in an integer bitmap rather then as a string, I think. If
someone were to fix that as well... :-)
-Matt
More information about the Kernel
mailing list