Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263736AbUJAQFf (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:05:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264098AbUJAQFf (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:05:35 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:30363 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263736AbUJAQFP (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:05:15 -0400 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:58:23 -0700 From: "Randy.Dunlap" To: Robert Love Cc: mpm@selenic.com, ttb@tentacle.dhs.org, akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gamin-list@gnome.org Subject: Re: [patch] make dnotify compile-time configurable Message-Id: <20041001085823.05adc9b5.rddunlap@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <1096645479.7676.15.camel@betsy.boston.ximian.com> References: <1096611874.4803.18.camel@localhost> <20041001151124.GQ31237@waste.org> <1096644076.7676.6.camel@betsy.boston.ximian.com> <20041001083110.76a58fd2.rddunlap@osdl.org> <1096645479.7676.15.camel@betsy.boston.ximian.com> Organization: OSDL X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-vine-linux-gnu) X-Face: +5V?h'hZQPB9kW 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 Content-Length: 1438 Lines: 39 On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:44:39 -0400 Robert Love wrote: | On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 08:31 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote: | | > I'd rather see inotify additions and dnotify config options kept | > separate. They may serve a similar purpose, but inotify doesn't | > replace the dnotify API. If the latter were true, combining | > them would make sense IMO. | | I'm not really following. | | Whether or not dnotify is a configuration option is separate, and could | go into the kernel either way. Sorry, that's about all that I was trying to say. If patches A & B are logically separate, don't combine them. Nothing new there. | But what matters if our inotify patch also carries the change? People | with inotify definitely DO want this patch, because they don't need | dnotify. Not much uses dnotify--it is a pain to use--and inotify | replaces its functionality. Well, the patch shouldn't remove dnotify unconditionally, or not until we have that elusive stable kernel series that people keep mentioning elsewhere. | It is also a practical move: the diffs conflict. I see. -- ~Randy MOTD: Always include version info. (Again. Sometimes I think ln -s /usr/src/linux/.config .signature) - 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/