On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 11:24:51AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote:
quoted text
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 04, 2008 at 03:52:37PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> >> Le Sat, 2 Aug 2008 12:38:48 -0400,
> >> "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Out of curiosity, why does the nfs client need disabling, but not
> >>> nfsd, gfs2, fuse, etc.?
> >> Then also need disabling.
> > 
> > OK by me, but again, why exactly?  Since you're replacing the locking
> > calls they used by stubs that just return errors, in theory nfs, nfsd,
> > gfs2, and the rest should still compile and run, just without locking
> > support, right?
> 
> I think so, but haven't tested this myself.
> 
> However, I would still be inclined to NOT add the extra config
> dependencies.  Just my 2 cents.

OK.  My fear was that there was some good reason that the nfs dependency
was added in the first place, and that it's since been lost....

--b.
--
unsubscribe notice
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/