On Fri, 2007-07-27 at 17:40 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > all - fs has options, but doesn't define ->show_options() > > some - fs defines ->show_options(), but some options are not shown > > noopt - fs does not have options > > good - fs shows all options > > patch - I have a patch > > [...] > > > > autofs all > > > > I'm not sure I understand this. > > How does autofs show it's options without a ->show_options method? > > It doesn't. The "all" means, all of them need to be added to > ->show_options(), not that all are shown. Oh .. sorry, I wasn't paying enough attention. But now might be a good time to propose the removal of autofs and rename autofs4 to autofs. I would need to provide some way to map autofs4 module load requests to autofs for backward compatibility but haven't thought about that yet. > > I can see now that this is slightly confusing, sorry. > > So the ones that need attention are "all" and "some". The others are > fine in theory. Of course I may have missed something. > > > > autofs4 some > > > > OK, uid and gid aren't shown. > > That should be straight forward to fix. > > What's your time frame for this? > > ASAP ;) > > 2.6.24 would be a nice, but it won't be easy... The autofs4 (and, if needed autofs) should be straight forward. I'll do these. Ian - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
