On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 10:34:12AM +0800, Ian Kent wrote: > Some time ago Christoph suggested registering both autofs and autofs4 > but I'm not sure about that since both modules have always only > registered autofs as the file system name. Oops, I didn't notice that. > We can add a MODULE_ALIAS() to the module source but that doesn't > completely work, I think because the user space tools then don't get the > directory right. Changing the user space configuration is also > problematic because booting from a kernel with and without would require > a configuration change every time. > > The obvious simple solution would be to use symlinks to make the > directory and module appear to be present, set about a process of user > awareness and remove them after some pre-defined number of subsequent > releases but I'm not sure how that approach would be received? We could > even write a module stub that issues a warning message to syslog and > then loads the autofs module but I haven't tried that yet. > > Please, folks, some suggestions. Just build two modules using the same source code? That quite ugly, but if the userspace is really that messed up I can't think of any better idea. -- 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
