On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 17:40 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > all - fs has options, but doesn't define ->show_options()
> > some - fs defines ->show_options(), but some options are not shown
> > noopt - fs does not have options
> > good - fs shows all options
> > patch - I have a patch
>
> [...]
>
> > > autofs all
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand this.
> > How does autofs show it's options without a ->show_options method?
>
> It doesn't. The "all" means, all of them need to be added to
> ->show_options(), not that all are shown.
Oh .. sorry, I wasn't paying enough attention.
But now might be a good time to propose the removal of autofs and rename
autofs4 to autofs. I would need to provide some way to map autofs4
module load requests to autofs for backward compatibility but haven't
thought about that yet.
>
> I can see now that this is slightly confusing, sorry.
>
> So the ones that need attention are "all" and "some". The others are
> fine in theory. Of course I may have missed something.
>
> > > autofs4 some
> >
> > OK, uid and gid aren't shown.
> > That should be straight forward to fix.
> > What's your time frame for this?
>
> ASAP ;)
>
> 2.6.24 would be a nice, but it won't be easy...
The autofs4 (and, if needed autofs) should be straight forward.
I'll do these.
Ian
-
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]
