Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752891AbYBEO6e (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:58:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750897AbYBEO60 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:58:26 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]:65517 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750805AbYBEO6Z (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:58:25 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=EpIRIuqMhT/EisPbJvN8acnSHHFF8WHk3RmHhq2pcLy9RWlM44Tt3SKcffQn1/Is5xjMTwGIjBwaG2Kcj1c5P6cZ1frXs5aKvOwohK0CuGA/zfOon34dYWVcYJr4xa8ghrgHPdHFAaSEtlHDNlTnkOg3rIA5CSExe+0S8RVJsmk= Message-ID: <524f69650802050658j4683c2aewefdc957f3b8b1d09@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:58:22 -0600 From: "Steve French" To: "Andrew Morton" Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] remove smbfs Cc: "Jeff Layton" , "Guenter Kukkukk" , samba-technical@lists.samba.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Adrian Bunk" , sfrench@samba.org In-Reply-To: <20080205001805.0ea014f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080128220835.GF8767@does.not.exist> <200801302216.13788.linux@kukkukk.com> <20080130174103.17ff8197@tleilax.poochiereds.net> <20080205001805.0ea014f3.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1741 Lines: 50 On Feb 5, 2008 2:18 AM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:41:03 -0500 Jeff Layton wrote: > > > I have no problem with targeting smbfs for removal, but I thought > > Andrew had an unofficial policy that we should first mark things to be > > deprecated, and then remove them 2 releases later. That seems like a > > sensible policy to me. If we mark it deprecated in 2.6.25 then we can > > remove it after 2.6.26 is released. > > > > It might not even hurt to have a nice loud printk when the smbfs > > module is plugged in to warn users that it's slated to be removed, > > and that they should move to CIFS as soon as possible. > From: Andrew Morton > > smbfs is a bit buggy and has no maintainer. Change it to shout at the user on > the first five mount attempts - tell them to switch to CIFS. > > Come December we'll mark it BROKEN and see what happens. > > + if (warn_count < 5) { > + warn_count++; > + printk(KERN_EMERG "smbfs is deprecated and will be removed in" > + " December, 2006. Please migrate to cifs\n"); > + } > > if (!raw_data) > goto out_no_data; > _ > > > queued for over 1.5 years waiting for the go-ahead from Steve. > > It looks like it's time? If so, what should I set the date to? If the 2.6.26 cycle would starts in April, then saying April 2008 is fine with me. -- Thanks, Steve -- 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/