From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S269446AbTGJPmk (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:42:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S269400AbTGJPlO (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:41:14 -0400 Received: from phoenix.infradead.org ([195.224.96.167]:6162 "EHLO phoenix.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S269379AbTGJPjI (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:39:08 -0400 Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 16:53:46 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Geert Uytterhoeven , jack@suse.cz Cc: Linux Kernel Development Subject: Re: CONFIG_QFMT_V2 vs. `VFS v0 quota format support' Message-ID: <20030710165346.A28322@infradead.org> Mail-Followup-To: Christoph Hellwig , Geert Uytterhoeven , jack@suse.cz, Linux Kernel Development References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from geert@linux-m68k.org on Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 05:50:33PM +0200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 10, 2003 at 05:50:33PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Why does the help text for CONFIG_QFMT_V2 say `VFS v0 quota format support' and > not `VFS v2 quota format support'? Ask Jan, that's the name he's been using all through the development of the patch and in the quota tools.