Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262566AbUKLQQw (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:16:52 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262565AbUKLQQv (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:16:51 -0500 Received: from rproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.170.205]:43044 "EHLO rproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262566AbUKLQQl (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Nov 2004 11:16:41 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=WDobHZkVniSkpOhmqVizyvXnQSMjD76X2XFG5bplVXAHMNvDSfUCvAeFxgBF5kR79MnqDLUbr63FFxb/SgOYBzj3/lI5+blXrSYXjCU//vbTD83P9aOhPMd4xOKU2LA1W6wv3f4IekpvLSVobRIQz7AeCQPIMYscpVgP6LdFJIE= Message-ID: <1a56ea390411120816c808c3c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 16:16:40 +0000 From: DaMouse Reply-To: DaMouse To: Adrian Bunk Subject: Re: 2.6.10-rc1-mm5: REISER4_LARGE_KEY is still selectable Cc: Vladimir Saveliev , Andrew Morton , Hans Reiser , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" In-Reply-To: <20041112132343.GF2310@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20041111012333.1b529478.akpm@osdl.org> <20041111165045.GA2265@stusta.de> <1100243278.1490.42.camel@tribesman.namesys.com> <20041112132343.GF2310@stusta.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1150 Lines: 37 On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:23:43 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 10:07:59AM +0300, Vladimir Saveliev wrote: > > > Hello > > Hi Vladimir, > > > On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 19:50, Adrian Bunk wrote: > > > REISER4_LARGE_KEY is still selectable in reiser4-include-reiser4.patch > > > (and we agreed that it shouldn't be). > > > > Sorry, concerning this problem - what did we agree about? > > depending on the setting of REISER4_LARGE_KEY, there are two binary > incompatible variants of reiser4 (which can't be both supported by one > kernel). > > Therefore, REISER4_LARGE_KEY shouldn't be asked but always enabled. > > Is there a good reason to actually keep it in the kernel altogether? methinks ripping it out entirely would be nicer than setting a config default. -DaMouse > > cu > Adrian > -- I know I broke SOMETHING but its their fault for not fixing it before me - 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/