From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 09:22:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 09:22:22 -0400 Received: from louise.pinerecords.com ([212.71.160.16]:26887 "EHLO louise.pinerecords.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 09:22:21 -0400 Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 15:22:16 +0200 From: Tomas Szepe To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.19pre8-ac2 Message-ID: <20020512132216.GH3749@louise.pinerecords.com> In-Reply-To: <20020512125151.GD3749@louise.pinerecords.com> <200205121319.g4CDJm403128@devserv.devel.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.99i X-OS: Linux/sparc 2.2.21-rc3-ext3-0.0.7a SMP (up 1 day, 4:41) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > [Alan Cox , May-12 2002, Sun, 09:19 -0400] > > > Alan, do you suppose you could integrate the new backported NTFS code in > > -ac at some not-so-distant point in time? I reckon that would be a generally > > appreciated decision, as demand of decent NTFS access has existed for > > quite a bit of time already and 2.6 will yet take a while to land. > > I'd rather see it stabilize in 2.5 first Okay, sounds fine. I was asking to find out whether it's not out of question entirely. T.