On Friday 08 October 2010 18:33:55 David Daney wrote: > On 10/08/2010 05:06 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > > On Thursday 07 October 2010 19:49:28 Eric Paris wrote: > >> The safest thing would probably be to punt the syscalls to 2.6.37. > >> Which is sad since I know a number of people are already working against > >> them, but maybe that proves it's the best approach? > > > > I agree with removing the syscalls from 2.6.36 because of the following > > reasons: > > How would the mechanics of this be achieved? > > Is it enough to just unconditionally return -ENOSYS from the sys_*() > functions? Or should all the patches be reverted? Whatever works I guess ... they would get reactivated pretty soon, anyway. Andreas -- 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
