Have I been fooled? Is this a forgery?. The header evidence does point
to it coming from "transmeta.com" (follow the domain/address ownership
trail from 209.10.217.66 -- the injection point into vger.rutgers.edu;
if that was really rutgers.edu's Received: stamp. There is a hop to
linus.qccnet.com after rutgers so that could be the forgery point, but
how did they get my address and what interest do they have in this
forgery?). I would hate to think Linus would "rip anyone a new one" in
this fashion. It certainly does not ring too well to the tune of "The
Cathedral and the Bazaar"'s discussion on cultivating OpenSource
programmers.
from the quill of Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> on scroll
<Pine.LNX.4.10.10005061250490.1470-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
>
>
> On Sat, 6 May 2000, Roman V. Shaposhnick wrote:
>
> > I've attached a patch which appears to make
> address_space_operations' interface
> > more logical and easy to use ( as it was discussed at linux-fsdevel
> ). The main
> > idea was to change additional argument of all methods to something
> that
> > interface do not care of, but all callers do. That's it.
>
> I hate "cookies". Despicable. Why pass them in at all if they are not
> supposed to be used for anything but callbacks?
>
> What you did just added lots of ugly casts and private fields, because
> the
> low-level FS's actually _did_ need to get "struct inode" or "struct
> dentry".
>
> In short, if this was disscussed on fs-devel, then I can only say that
> "fs-devel" doesn't seem to have any taste at all. Worthless mailing
> list.
>
> Linus
>
--
Brian J. Murrell InterLinx Support Services, Inc.
North Vancouver, B.C. 604 983 UNIX
Platform and Brand Independent UNIX Support - R3.2 - R4 - BSD
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun May 07 2000 - 21:00:20 EST