From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262416AbTENOla (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 10:41:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262422AbTENOla (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 10:41:30 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:58785 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262416AbTENOl3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 May 2003 10:41:29 -0400 Subject: Re: supermount From: Alan Cox To: ismail donmez Cc: gutko@poczta.onet.pl, Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <1052919666.273b9220kde@smtp-send.myrealbox.com> References: <1052919666.273b9220kde@smtp-send.myrealbox.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1052920487.2491.8.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 14 May 2003 14:54:48 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mer, 2003-05-14 at 14:41, ismail donmez wrote: > Yeah I wonder the same for some time . Is there a good reason not to include supermount in kernel? Its not considered of sufficient quality currently, and has or had races that were not fixed. I'm sure Juan will submit it post 2.6 if he gets it to a polished state