Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262045AbUD1U25 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:28:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261661AbUD1U0X (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:26:23 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:4274 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262003AbUD1UXP (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:23:15 -0400 Message-ID: <409012A4.9000502@pobox.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:23:00 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030703 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Neal D. Becker" CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: State of linux checkpointing? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 540 Lines: 18 Neal D. Becker wrote: > I wonder if there is a checkpointing that will work with 2.6 kernels? > > I only need relatively basic checkpointing. No sockets or fancy stuff. You only need checkpointing when your application programmers are lazy and don't care about data integrity. :) Jeff - 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/