Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:56:47 +0800 (WST)
From: Ian Kent <raven@themaw.net>
To: Jim Carter <jimc@math.ucla.edu>
cc: Mike Waychison <Michael.Waychison@sun.com>,
       autofs mailing list <autofs@linux.kernel.org>,
       Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0401091249250.9335@simba.math.ucla.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0401101347210.2403-100000@wombat.indigo.net.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1110
Lines: 30

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, Jim Carter wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Ian Kent wrote:
> > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Mike Waychison wrote:
> > > This module will have its own new autofs module (hopefully named
> > > something other than autofs to avoid confusion/mishaps).  The VFS will
>
> autofs v3 -> autofs.o
> autofs v4 -> autofs4.o
> May I suggest autofs5.o?  It should still be named "autofs-something",
> after all.
>

Nop. I will continue to develop under the v4 banner. As far as I'm
concerned Peter Anvin has claimed v5 and I don't want to challenge that.
Mike Waychisons' initiative may possibly be called v6???

In any case the module works fine with v3 and v4 (I haven't tested
4.0.0pre10 for a while though). The 4.1 daemon detects the enhanced module
if present. It is currently dubed 4.04. The 'plays well with others' is a
self imposed design requirement.

Ian


-
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/