On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 12:31:33PM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:
>
> > It would probably be better implemented with a more generic mechanism,
> > but I don't believe anyone is working on that now, so it looks like AFS
> > will continue to use a special syscall.
>
> We could put an #ifdef CONFIG_AFS into the syscall table definition?
> That makes it explicit.
No. AFS is utterly wrong, and the sooner we make it fail to work the better.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
