Christoph Hellwig wrote: > If someone really wants a patch to corrupt their filesystems they know > where to find it. > No need for pettiness. Andrew's already intimated that he's still working the patch, and he's a very clever lad and knows if it corrupts it needs more work. What I don't understand is how anybody could be satisfied with the status quo. We cannot leave vfat unchanged, for that will perpetuate a pool of victims to be sued, and Linux loses credibility every time that happens. Something *must* change. What is especially attractive about Andrew's position (he said this more eloquently than me) is that developing a solution to avoid the patent will impact Microsoft revenues; and that will be most instructive to them. That's almost sufficient reason by itself! -- 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
