[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CAF47F3.3070800@caviumnetworks.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 09:33:55 -0700
From: David Daney <ddaney@...iumnetworks.com>
To: Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
CC: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.36-rc7
On 10/08/2010 05:06 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
> On Thursday 07 October 2010 19:49:28 Eric Paris wrote:
>> The safest thing would probably be to punt the syscalls to 2.6.37.
>> Which is sad since I know a number of people are already working against
>> them, but maybe that proves it's the best approach?
>
> I agree with removing the syscalls from 2.6.36 because of the following
> reasons:
How would the mechanics of this be achieved?
Is it enough to just unconditionally return -ENOSYS from the sys_*()
functions? Or should all the patches be reverted?
David Daney
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists