From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264419AbTLBV7M (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:59:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264420AbTLBV7M (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:59:12 -0500 Received: from s383.jpl.nasa.gov ([137.79.94.127]:49116 "EHLO s383.jpl.nasa.gov") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264419AbTLBV7I (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Dec 2003 16:59:08 -0500 Message-ID: <3FCD0AA2.2030306@jpl.nasa.gov> Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 13:56:50 -0800 From: Bryan Whitehead Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030630 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, zh, zh-cn, zh-hk, zh-sg, zh-tw, ja MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arjan van de Ven CC: "Peter C. Norton" , Christoph Hellwig , Ian Kent , Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 future References: <20031201153316.B3879@infradead.org> <20031201213651.GK18176@lenin.nu> <1070322894.5260.5.camel@laptop.fenrus.com> <20031202201040.GX18176@lenin.nu> <20031202201800.GB2030@devserv.devel.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20031202201800.GB2030@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:10:40PM -0800, Peter C. Norton wrote: > >>On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 12:54:54AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 2003-12-01 at 22:36, Peter C. Norton wrote: >>>` >>> >>>>encouraging the distros to get behind autofs4 (hint hint, redhat, >>>>hint). >>> >>>I suspect you'll have a really hard time finding ANY distro that still >>>wants to actively develop new products on a 2.4 codebase. >> >>Perhaps, but some rather large customers of AS2.1, would like it if >>redhat could deliver the large outstanding automounting features for >>their (mainly sun) environments. Since these environments resist >>change, upgrading a kernel to include a newer autofs4 is more likely >>than upgrading the whole system. > > > and putting a feature into 2.4.23 is going to help/change that... how ? From a sysadmin with rather large Solaris / Linux install base I'd love to see a fully working autofs in 2.4. But I would loath running 2.6 on a much needed production system... Hacking around the junk version of autofs in 2.4 is a pain. -- Bryan Whitehead SysAdmin - JPL - Interferometry and Large Optical Systems Phone: 818 354 2903 driver@jpl.nasa.gov