Ian Kent wrote: > > Sorry, I haven't had time to do more on this. > There is also the issue of what to do about removing the autofs module > and renaming autofs4 to autofs, as this will break the autofs module. > > I did start contacting people I think would want to know about this but > haven't gone further than an initial mail. > > The other thing is that this patch was originally written quite a while > ago and, although it appears to work ok, I'm not sure it's quite what we > need. > For what it's worth, the v2 protocol was only used very very early on, and the only difference between the v2 and the v3 protocol is that the v3 protocol supported the expiration ioctl. There is no reason to believe there are any current users of the v2 protocol, but from the kernel point of view it is a strict subset of the v3 protocol, so adding support for it is effectively no-op. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- 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
