Perhaps because they want us to fix our "hideous" interfaces, and wanted us to stop waiting for someone else to design the new ones and write the necessary kernel bits?Why would Red Hat specifically care about OpenAFS? In particular, why would they care about making it fail to work?
Derrick tried to submit a patch that implimented "safe" syscall registration modeled on nfsservctl, and got nothing but pushback about how dispatching interfaces suck, and that instead afs should use an "open/read/write/close" method. This wasn't from redhat, but it's an indication of how the linux-kernel community views the openafs implementation.
_______________________________________________
OpenAFS-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
