On 19 March 2015 at 18:40, Hin-Tak Leung <htl10@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Also, the logic of hfs_brec_insert() in the plain hfs (without +) driver in >>> fs/hfs/brec.c is essentially the same, so I believe there is the need of another >>> similiar patch for that also. Can you provide that also? >> >>No. The original HFS is very old. The only reasonable purpose of its >>implementation in Linux IMO is to read data from old disks. Read-only >>mode that is. > > I don't think it is right to dictate how users should use their linux box. > On the whole we should only stop fixing bugs if we are going > to deprecate hfs (and subsequently remove it). Also, there is some value > in keeping two file systems which are code-wise very similar in sync. > > If you cannot find the time, but otherwise have no objection, I'd be happy to > spend the time to prepare the patch, and add your signed-off on it? Of course, I have no objections. But, please, do not add me in signed-off-by. Because signed-off-by implies some responsibility, and I do not want to have one for hfs. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html