On Fri, 12 May 2006 09:59:11 -0700 (PDT), Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote: >On Fri, 12 May 2006, John Kelly wrote: >> Users who need vintage features can use vintage kernels. They haven't >> been pulled off the market. >I disagree. What can I say? You're the man. I think you maintain a great kernel, btw. I just think forward progress would be easier without dragging around some of the old baggage in the kernel. - 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: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- References:
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: Jan Engelhardt <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: John Kelly <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: John Kelly <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- Prev by Date: Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- Next by Date: [PATCH -rt] show_held_locks cleanup
- Previous by thread: Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- Next by thread: Re: + deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch added to -mm tree
- Index(es):
 |