On 5/11/06, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The patch titled
>
> deprecate smbfs in favour of cifs
>
> has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
>
> deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch
>
> See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
> out what to do about this
>
>
> From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
>
> smbfs is a bit buggy and has no maintainer. Change it to shout at the user on
> the first five mount attempts - tell them to switch to CIFS.
>
> Come November we'll mark it BROKEN and see what happens.
>
[snip]
Perhaps an addition to Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is
also in order?
Something noting that it will be marked as broken in November and go
away some 12 - 18 months after that perhaps?
--
Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
"Jesper Juhl" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 5/11/06, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > The patch titled
> >
> > deprecate smbfs in favour of cifs
> >
> > has been added to the -mm tree. Its filename is
> >
> > deprecate-smbfs-in-favour-of-cifs.patch
> >
> > See http://www.zip.com.au/~akpm/linux/patches/stuff/added-to-mm.txt to find
> > out what to do about this
> >
> >
> > From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
> >
> > smbfs is a bit buggy and has no maintainer. Change it to shout at the user on
> > the first five mount attempts - tell them to switch to CIFS.
> >
> > Come November we'll mark it BROKEN and see what happens.
> >
> [snip]
>
> Perhaps an addition to Documentation/feature-removal-schedule.txt is
> also in order?
That seems a bit duplicative, so I didn't bother.
> Something noting that it will be marked as broken in November and go
> away some 12 - 18 months after that perhaps?
We'll see. We'd like to remove it as early as poss, of course. But right
now, I don't know when that'll be.
The personal challenge is to remove it before Greg gets his devfs-removal
patches in ;)
On Thu, 11 May 2006 11:27:18 -0700, Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
wrote:
>We'll see. We'd like to remove it as early as poss, of course. But right
>now, I don't know when that'll be.
>The personal challenge is to remove it before Greg gets his devfs-removal
>patches in ;)
I read there might be a bugfix release. A garbage removal release
would help too. Then it would be easier to see the bugs.