On Sat, Apr 05, 2008 at 08:13:47PM +0100, Miguel Sousa Filipe wrote:
> My question is, is there sill interestest in having btrfs compatible
> with older kernels (like, 2.6.20 or 2.6.18)?
> I'll post (or repost) patches that I need for btrfs-unstable to
> build/work on this ppc system of mine.
It sort of depends who you ask. Personally, I see value in being
compatible with as wide range of kernels as possible in a development
filesystem that you want people to be testing. But then I'm not
doing any btrfs development, so I don't count for much.
Other people, well - Christoph Hellwig had this to say a little
while back in <20080207044835.GC4140@xxxxxx> (rewrapped):
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:14:51PM -0500, Jeff Mahoney wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Kernels prior to 2.6.19 don't export file_ra_state_init().
> This patch adds the file_ra_state_init() from 2.6.18.
Please put this somewhere else, a separate file and hopefully
only in your backports tree. This is kernels from stoneage
after all, not just one or two revisions back.
Bron ( not being particularly helpful or even answering your
question really )
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
