On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 01:01:32PM -0700, Paul Jackson wrote: > Another vote in favor of relayfs here ... > > I am reminded by my good colleagues at SGI that relayfs is a key > to the Linux Trace Toolkit (LTT), which is in turn an important > technology for some product(s) on which SGI is working. I don't think anyone cares for product plans of particular companies. That beein said I wish LTT folks would make a little more progress so we could actually include it. - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Karim Yaghmour <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- References:
- Merging relayfs?
- From: Tom Zanussi <[email protected]>
- relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <[email protected]>
- Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Tom Zanussi <[email protected]>
- [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Tom Zanussi <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: bert hubert <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- Merging relayfs?
- Prev by Date: Re: Memory Management
- Next by Date: Re: relayfs as infrastructure, ltt, systemtap, diskstat
- Previous by thread: Re: relayfs as infrastructure, ltt, systemtap, diskstat
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] Re: relayfs documentation sucks?
- Index(es):
