From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:36:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:36:29 -0400 Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:8876 "EHLO virtualhost.dk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 1 Oct 2002 12:36:27 -0400 Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 18:41:36 +0200 From: Jens Axboe To: Joe Thornber Cc: Dave Jones , venom@sns.it, Alexander Viro , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove LVM from 2.5 (resend) Message-ID: <20021001164136.GG5755@suse.de> References:

<20021001154808.GD126@suse.de> <20021001160608.GX3867@suse.de> <20021001163508.GA30457@fib011235813.fsnet.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20021001163508.GA30457@fib011235813.fsnet.co.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 01 2002, Joe Thornber wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 06:06:08PM +0200, Jens Axboe wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 01 2002, Dave Jones wrote: > > > Consider it patch 1/2 of the device mapper merge 8-) > > > > Indeed, the patches are also arriving out of order though, LVM remove > > patch should be 2/2 not 1/2. IMO. > > If LVM remotely worked I would agree with you. No matter the state of lvm, it's much better to day "1, here's the replacement - 2, rip the old one out". What if device mapper for 2.5 really sucks? Maybe it's so bad that we'd rather fix up lvm1? Apparently davej has patches that sort-of makes lvm work. It's not likely, but still :-) -- Jens Axboe