Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)
From: Alan Cox (alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: 06/21/05
- Previous message: nanakos_at_wired-net.gr: "2.6 sendfile"
- In reply to: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Next in thread: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Reply: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 13:39:28 +0100
On Maw, 2005-06-21 at 11:22, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> So I welcome constructive discussion. However bear in mind, that I
> definitely don't want to disable unprivileged mounts. For me that is
> _the_ most important feature of FUSE.
If the choice was "merge FUSE without unpriv mounts for now" or "discard
fuse completely" which is preferable.
It seems to me (just IMHO) that it would be better to merge FUSE without
that feature and then spend the time getting that feature right _in
parallel_ with people using, breaking and reviewing FUSE a lot more.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: nanakos_at_wired-net.gr: "2.6 sendfile"
- In reply to: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Next in thread: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Reply: Miklos Szeredi: "Re: -mm -> 2.6.13 merge status (fuse)"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
