I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
The goal of the project is to move util-linux code back to useful state, sync
with actual distributions and kernel and make development more transparent end
open.
The short term goals (for 2.13 release):
- remove all NFS code from util-linux-ng
(/sbin/mount.nfs from nfs-utils is replacement)
- remove FS/device detection code
(libblkid from e2fsprogs or libvolumeid is replacement)
- move as much as possible patches from distributions to upstream
Mailing list:
http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#util-linux-ng
FTP:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/
GIT:
git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/util-linux-ng.git util-linux-ng
[Note, GIT repo contains previous 47 versions of util-linux.]
The mailing list or my private e-mail are open for your patches, ideas and
suggestion. The mailing list is also place where you can help us review
patches.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[email protected]>
On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 08:52 +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
>
> I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
Perhaps forwarding this to fs-devel would be good also.
>
> The goal of the project is to move util-linux code back to useful state, sync
> with actual distributions and kernel and make development more transparent end
> open.
>
> The short term goals (for 2.13 release):
>
> - remove all NFS code from util-linux-ng
> (/sbin/mount.nfs from nfs-utils is replacement)
> - remove FS/device detection code
> (libblkid from e2fsprogs or libvolumeid is replacement)
> - move as much as possible patches from distributions to upstream
>
> Mailing list:
> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#util-linux-ng
>
> FTP:
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/
>
> GIT:
> git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/util-linux-ng/util-linux-ng.git util-linux-ng
>
> [Note, GIT repo contains previous 47 versions of util-linux.]
>
>
> The mailing list or my private e-mail are open for your patches, ideas and
> suggestion. The mailing list is also place where you can help us review
> patches.
>
> Karel
>
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 05:35:29PM +0900, Ian Kent wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-12-18 at 08:52 +0100, Karel Zak wrote:
> >
> > I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> > is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
>
> Perhaps forwarding this to fs-devel would be good also.
Fixed.
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[email protected]>
On Monday 18 December 2006 08:52, Karel Zak wrote:
> I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
Fork? Are you saying that you just didn't take over maintainership and now we
will have two versions of util-linux!? :/
> Karel
--
Arkadiusz Mi?kiewicz PLD/Linux Team
arekm / maven.pl http://ftp.pld-linux.org/
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Monday 18 December 2006 08:52, Karel Zak wrote:
> > I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> > is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
>
> Fork? Are you saying that you just didn't take over maintainership and now we
> will have two versions of util-linux!? :/
>
We tried, believe me, but couldn't get agreement (or a response from
current maintainer).
Ian
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 10:33:33AM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> > after few weeks I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This
> > project is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
> >
> > The goal of the project is to move util-linux code back to useful state, sync
> > with actual distributions and kernel and make development more transparent end
> > open.
>
> If Adrian [ http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/11/9/262 ] does not want to be
> the maintainer, ask if you can take over, including the name.
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 10:55:05AM +0100, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> On Monday 18 December 2006 08:52, Karel Zak wrote:
> > I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> > is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
>
> Fork? Are you saying that you just didn't take over maintainership and now we
> will have two versions of util-linux!? :/
People around util-linux-ng are not so naive ;-)
We spent last month with discussion about a way how (non-)fork this
project. We made decision that a fork is the right way, because
Adrian Bunk completely ignores __everyone__ who wants to talk with
him about utils-linux.
A fork is nothing attractive, but it's also a way how improve things
in Open Source world.
The goal is not only improve source code, but also a way how this
project is maintained (mailing list, discussion about changes, git,
transparent development, ...).
Karel
--
Karel Zak <[email protected]>
On Mon, Dec 18 2006, Ian Kent wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
>
> > On Monday 18 December 2006 08:52, Karel Zak wrote:
> > > I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> > > is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
> >
> > Fork? Are you saying that you just didn't take over maintainership and now we
> > will have two versions of util-linux!? :/
> >
>
> We tried, believe me, but couldn't get agreement (or a response from
> current maintainer).
That's ridiculous. Adrian, why don't you just sign over maintainership
of util-linux, if you don't have time to cater for it? At least answer
emails on the subject, you seem to be busy here on lkml all the time, so
I'm sure you can find 2 minutes to wrap this up.
--
Jens Axboe
On Wed, 2006-12-20 at 13:19 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 18 2006, Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Dec 2006, Arkadiusz Miskiewicz wrote:
> >
> > > On Monday 18 December 2006 08:52, Karel Zak wrote:
> > > > I'm pleased to announce a new "util-linux-ng" project. This project
> > > > is a fork of the original util-linux (2.13-pre7).
> > >
> > > Fork? Are you saying that you just didn't take over maintainership and now we
> > > will have two versions of util-linux!? :/
> > >
> >
> > We tried, believe me, but couldn't get agreement (or a response from
> > current maintainer).
>
> That's ridiculous. Adrian, why don't you just sign over maintainership
> of util-linux, if you don't have time to cater for it? At least answer
> emails on the subject, you seem to be busy here on lkml all the time, so
> I'm sure you can find 2 minutes to wrap this up.
>
Or even accept the offer of help and co-maintainer ship in the spirit
that was given.
Unfortunately we ended up having to fork.
Ian