From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S1750951AbWAYRVT@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1750951AbWAYRVT (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:21:19 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750957AbWAYRVS
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:21:18 -0500
Received: from ns.virtualhost.dk ([195.184.98.160]:35149 "EHLO virtualhost.dk")
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750951AbWAYRVQ (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:21:16 -0500
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 18:23:24 +0100
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de>
To: Joerg Schilling <schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de>
Cc: jengelh@linux01.gwdg.de, rlrevell@joe-job.com, matthias.andree@gmx.de,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) (was: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?)
Message-ID: <20060125172324.GL4212@suse.de>
References: <20060123185549.GA15985@merlin.emma.line.org> <43D530CC.nailC4Y11KE7A@burner> <1138048255.21481.15.camel@mindpipe> <20060123212119.GI1820@merlin.emma.line.org> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0601241823390.28682@yvahk01.tjqt.qr> <43D78585.nailD7855YVBX@burner> <20060125142155.GW4212@suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0601251544400.31234@yvahk01.tjqt.qr> <20060125145544.GA4212@suse.de> <43D7AEBF.nailDFJ7263OE@burner>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <43D7AEBF.nailDFJ7263OE@burner>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Jan 25 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Jens Axboe <axboe@suse.de> wrote:
> 
> > It just looks like Joerg needs to do his homework, before spreading
> > false information on lkml. Then again, all his "arguments" are the same
> > as last time (and the time before, and before, and so on).
> 
> Before spreading your false claims, please do your homework.

Sorry Joerg, _you_ really are the one that has to do your homework as
you aptly demonstrated.

> We previously had mostly fruitful discussion before you did appear.
> Please either try to contribute useful ideas or stay out.

You are spreading blatently false claim about the code and repeating the
same old suggestions on what _you_ think Linux design should be like. So
I had to correct it, which I did.

-- 
Jens Axboe