From: "Kendrick M. Smith" Subject: Re: patch 01/38: switches in fs/Config.in, fs/Config.help Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2002 15:13:27 -0400 (EDT) Sender: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <10696.1970836439$1029352813@news.gmane.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu ([141.211.2.162]) by usw-sf-list1.sourceforge.net with esmtp (Exim 3.31-VA-mm2 #1 (Debian)) id 17f3aI-0004SQ-00 for ; Wed, 14 Aug 2002 12:13:34 -0700 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Errors-To: nfs-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Discussion of NFS under Linux development, interoperability, and testing. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: >>>>> " " == Christoph Hellwig writes: > On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 06:55:35PM -0400, Kendrick M. Smith > wrote: >> This patch defines new switches in fs/Config.in - >> CONFIG_NFS_V4: enables nfsv4 client CONFIG_NFSD_V4: enables >> nfsv4 server CONFIG_SUNRPC_GSSD_CLNT: enables in-kernel client >> for GSSD > This should be the last patch after the code got in.. I agree, patch 1/38 should be renumbered to 38/38, and everything else shifted back by one. If I have to repost the patchset (e.g. after rediff to 2.5.32), I'll be sure to do this. In the meantime, patch 1/38 does not conflict with any of the others; the patches can be applied cleanly in the order 2,3,4,....,38, 1 Maybe we can just consider this to be the patch ordering for purposes of deciding which to apply to the 2.5.31 tree? This way I won't have to repost 200K of patches before 2.5.32 comes out... Thanks, Kendrick ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by: Dice - The leading online job board for high-tech professionals. Search and apply for tech jobs today! http://seeker.dice.com/seeker.epl?rel_code=31 _______________________________________________ NFS maillist - NFS@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs