On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 01:02:35PM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2010-03-05 at 15:48 +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > > Or I can do a new branch, put updated pair of patches there (hch has sent > > the updated variants my way) and ask you to rebuild NFS tree. Which will > > also suck, since it adds PITA for you and you are completely innocent in > > that clusterfuck. > > > > Suggestions? I'd love to get out of that mess with minimal PITA for > > everyone involved and minimally messed tree... > > Hi Al, > > I'd be fine with rebuilding the NFS tree. I have all the patches which > depend on write_inode in their own separate branch anyway, so I'd only > have to rebase that branch and then merge it with the main NFS client > tree... Ehh... Just after I've sent a pull request for backmerge variant... Anyway, I've put rebased variant in the same tree, branch called write_inode2. Same diffstat, same shortlog (sans merges). Either branch will do; write_inode2 obviously has cleaner history. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
