mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
To: Robert Love <rml@novell.com>
Cc: mpm@selenic.com, ttb@tentacle.dhs.org, akpm@osdl.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gamin-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: [patch] make dnotify compile-time configurable
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:58:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041001085823.05adc9b5.rddunlap@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1096645479.7676.15.camel@betsy.boston.ximian.com>

On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 11:44:39 -0400 Robert Love wrote:

| On Fri, 2004-10-01 at 08:31 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
| 
| > I'd rather see inotify additions and dnotify config options kept
| > separate.  They may serve a similar purpose, but inotify doesn't
| > replace the dnotify API.  If the latter were true, combining
| > them would make sense IMO.
| 
| I'm not really following.
| 
| Whether or not dnotify is a configuration option is separate, and could
| go into the kernel either way.

Sorry, that's about all that I was trying to say.  If patches A & B
are logically separate, don't combine them.  Nothing new there.

| But what matters if our inotify patch also carries the change?  People
| with inotify definitely DO want this patch, because they don't need
| dnotify.  Not much uses dnotify--it is a pain to use--and inotify
| replaces its functionality.

Well, the patch shouldn't remove dnotify unconditionally, or not
until we have that elusive stable kernel series that people keep
mentioning elsewhere.

| It is also a practical move: the diffs conflict.

I see.

-- 
~Randy
MOTD:  Always include version info.
(Again.  Sometimes I think ln -s /usr/src/linux/.config .signature)

  reply	other threads:[~2004-10-01 16:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-01  6:24 Robert Love
2004-10-01 15:11 ` Matt Mackall
2004-10-01 15:21   ` Robert Love
2004-10-01 15:31     ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-10-01 15:44       ` Robert Love
2004-10-01 15:58         ` Randy.Dunlap [this message]
2004-10-01 17:01           ` Robert Love
2004-10-01 17:27             ` Matt Mackall
2004-10-01 17:30               ` Robert Love
2004-10-01 17:30                 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-10-01 17:37                   ` Robert Love
2004-10-01 17:38                     ` Randy.Dunlap

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20041001085823.05adc9b5.rddunlap@osdl.org \
    --to=rddunlap@osdl.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=gamin-list@gnome.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mpm@selenic.com \
    --cc=rml@novell.com \
    --cc=ttb@tentacle.dhs.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®