From: Michael Clark <michael@metaparadigm.com>
To: Shawn <core@enodev.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Alexander Viro <viro@math.psu.edu>,
Andreas Dilger <adilger@clusterfs.com>,
Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove LVM from 2.5 (resend)
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 23:22:01 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D9C6099.9060504@metaparadigm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20021003100702.C32461@q.mn.rr.com
On 10/03/02 23:07, Shawn wrote:
> On 10/03, Michael Clark said something like:
>
>>On 10/03/02 20:38, Alan Cox wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 2002-10-03 at 06:50, Michael Clark wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>... and you don't need EVMS for that.
>>>>
>>>>But EVMS would be an excellent substitute in the mean time.
>>>>
>>>>Better to having something excellent now than something perfect but
>>>>too late.
>>>
>
> This statement is misleading; in no way is EVMS intended as an
> interim solution to a problem addressed easier in other ways. It's
> a fundamental change which happens to address certain critical issues
> and also adds functionality whiz-bangs.
Yes, i agree. It's not the original intention of EVMS to be used
as a unified interface to all linux block devices. Although it
could be used in that way if desired by any individual user -
to provide a solution to the consistent block device naming issue.
>>>You can see who around here has maintained kernel code and who hasnt.
>>>You don't want a substitute in the mean time, because then you have to
>>>get rid of it
>>
>>Like LVM ;)
>
>
> Not quite...
Well, existing LVM does appear to be a subsitute for a better solution
(dm or EVMS) for which it's time has come to be removed.
~mc
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-10-03 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-10-01 14:06 [PATCH] Remove LVM from 2.5 (resend) Joe Thornber
2002-10-01 14:15 ` Alexander Viro
2002-10-01 14:52 ` venom
2002-10-01 15:48 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-01 16:06 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 16:35 ` Joe Thornber
2002-10-01 16:41 ` Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 23:19 ` venom
2002-10-01 18:42 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-10-02 1:00 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-02 4:24 ` Theodore Ts'o
2002-10-02 13:34 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-02 14:54 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-10-02 17:09 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-02 22:29 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2002-10-02 22:46 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-02 23:14 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-10-02 23:22 ` Alexander Viro
2002-10-03 5:50 ` Michael Clark
2002-10-03 12:38 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-03 14:09 ` Michael Clark
2002-10-03 15:07 ` Shawn
2002-10-03 15:22 ` Michael Clark [this message]
2002-10-06 5:05 ` GrandMasterLee
2002-10-01 19:12 ` Matthias Andree
2002-10-01 23:25 ` venom
2002-10-01 17:09 ` Status of InterMezzo in 2.5 Andreas Dilger
2002-10-01 14:40 ` [PATCH] Remove LVM from 2.5 (resend) Jens Axboe
2002-10-01 14:54 ` Joe Thornber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3D9C6099.9060504@metaparadigm.com \
--to=michael@metaparadigm.com \
--cc=adilger@clusterfs.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=core@enodev.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lmb@suse.de \
--cc=viro@math.psu.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).