Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:37:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:37:23 -0500 Received: from saturn.cs.uml.edu ([129.63.8.2]:57618 "EHLO saturn.cs.uml.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:37:10 -0500 From: "Albert D. Cahalan" Message-Id: <200103170435.f2H4ZnB65925@saturn.cs.uml.edu> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Improved version reporting To: Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2001 23:35:49 -0500 (EST) Cc: acahalan@cs.uml.edu, viro@math.psu.edu, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linus@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rhw@memalpha.cx, seberino@spawar.navy.mil In-Reply-To: from "Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl" at Mar 15, 2001 10:52:25 AM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andries.Brouwer writes: >> From: "Albert D. Cahalan" >>> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote: >>>>> +o Console Tools # 0.3.3 # loadkeys -V >>>>> +o Mount # 2.10e # mount --version >>>> >>>> Concerning mount: (i) the version mentioned is too old, >> >> Exactly why? Mere missing features don't make for a required >> upgrade. Version number inflation should be resisted. ... > These days you can mount several filesystems at the same mount point. > The old mount does not understand this at all. > Recent versions of mount act better in this respect, > even though it is still easy to confuse them. The rule should be like this: List the lowest version number required to get 2.2.xx-level features while running a 2.4.xx kernel. Remember what the purpose of the table is. It is a list of REQUIRED upgrades. Failure to upgrade should result in a broken system. So pppd must be listed, since somebody changed the kernel API for 2.4.1. If I run the mount command from Red Hat 6.2, using it as intended for a 2.2.xx kernel, doesn't everything work? There won't be any multi-mount confusion because 2.2.xx can't do that anyway. There isn't any problem with NFSv3 either, since 2.2.xx lacks NFSv3. Basically I ask: would existing scripts for a 2.2.xx kernel break? If the old mount can still do what it used to do, then "mount" need not be listed at all. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/