On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Lo! To give a bit more background to this (the mail I reply to was the
> first I sent with git send-email and I missed some details): Maybe I'm
> over stretching my abilities/position as regression tracker with this
> RFC for a revert, but I hope it at least triggers a discussion if such a
> revert should be done or not.
I don't think that a revert is appropriate.
But perhaps just a single printk() or something if the user does *not*
specify the version explicitly? Just saying something like
We used to default to 1.0, we now default to 3.0, if you want old
defaults, use "vers=1.0"
Oh, looking at that version parsing code, I think we also need to fix
that legacy "ver=1" thing (ver without the 's') which now silently
ignores "ver=1" as being the "default", even though it's not.
I do *not* believe that "default to version 1" is acceptable.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
