On Fri, 09 Jun 2006 23:22:23 +0400, Alex Tomas said: > what if proposed patch is safer than an average fix? > (given that it's just out of usage unless enabled) Those are the *dangerous* patches, because they usually contain bugs that weren't tripped over by the 6 people who enabled it while it was bouncing around in the -mm tree....
Attachment:
pgpvZI3s0gw9b.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Andreas Dilger <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- References:
- [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Mingming Cao <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: "Mike Snitzer" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Jeff Garzik <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- From: Alex Tomas <[email protected]>
- [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] usb: new driver for Cypress CY7C63xxx mirco controllers
- Next by Date: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Previous by thread: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Next by thread: Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3
- Index(es):
 |