On Sat, 10 Jan 2004, Ian Kent wrote: > On Thu, 8 Jan 2004, Mike Waychison wrote: > > This module will have its own new autofs module (hopefully named > > something other than autofs to avoid confusion/mishaps). The VFS will autofs v3 -> autofs.o autofs v4 -> autofs4.o May I suggest autofs5.o? It should still be named "autofs-something", after all. James F. Carter Voice 310 825 2897 FAX 310 206 6673 UCLA-Mathnet; 6115 MSA; 405 Hilgard Ave.; Los Angeles, CA, USA 90095-1555 Email: jimc _at_ math.ucla.edu http://www.math.ucla.edu/~jimc (q.v. for PGP key) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo _at_ vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Follow-Ups: References:
- Prev by Date: Re: inode_cache / dentry_cache not being reclaimed aggressivelyenough on low-memory PCs
- Next by Date: Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
- Previous by thread: Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
- Next by thread: Re: [autofs] [RFC] Towards a Modern Autofs
- Indexes:[Main][Thread]