RE: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010)

From: Jan Mikkelsen <janm_at_transactionware.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:47:38 +1100

Daichi GOTO wrote:
> All folks have interests in improved unionfs should keep attentions
> and ask "how about merge?" at every turn :)

OK.  How about a merge?

I'd really like to see this in 6-STABLE.

Regards,

Jan Mikkelsen.

Received on Thu Mar 16 2006 - 04:47:47 UTC

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Peter Blok: "RE: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010)"
Previous message: Scott Robbins: "Re: smbfs regression in 6.1-PRE and 7-current"
In reply to: Daichi GOTO: "Re: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010)"
Next in thread: Daichi GOTO: "Re: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010)"
Reply: Daichi GOTO: "Re: patchset-9 release (Re: [unionfs][patch] improvements of the unionfs - Problem Report, kern/91010)"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:53 UTC