On Fri, May 20, 2005 at 10:07:48AM +0200, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 10:09:00PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Hi Sjoerd,
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 12:20:13AM +0200, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
Just uploaded hal 0.4.7-3sarge1 to testing-proposed-updates. This removes
the sync
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 10:09:00PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Hi Sjoerd,
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 12:20:13AM +0200, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
Just uploaded hal 0.4.7-3sarge1 to testing-proposed-updates. This removes
the sync option from the default setup and adds a warning to the example
fdi
Hi Martin,
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 05:32:34PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 4:38 -0700]:
I read the thread and it convinced me to change the pmount default
from sync to async (which would be a trivial change) and replace the
--async option with a --sync option.
Hi Sjoerd,
On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 12:20:13AM +0200, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 05:32:34PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 4:38 -0700]:
I read the thread and it convinced me to change the pmount default
from sync to async (which would be a
Package: pmount
Version: 0.8-1
Severity: grave
Hi,
apparently the sync option really should *NOT* be used, especially not by
default:
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/22/111748.html
Probably the best way is to get rid of the sync default in favour of an async
default,
tags 309591 sid
thanks
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 08:51:42AM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
Package: pmount
Version: 0.8-1
Severity: grave
apparently the sync option really should *NOT* be used, especially not by
default:
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/22/111748.html
Indeed, grave may have been too high, but then the Severity description
forgot to include the possibility of actually killing hardware, which should
be rated rather high IMHO.
I didn't know about the Sid tagging (Sid here, with a custom 2.6.11-ck8
kernel), sorry.
The LKML thread indicates that
tag 309591 sarge
thanks
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 1:05 -0700]:
apparently the sync option really should *NOT* be used, especially not by
default:
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/22/111748.html
This may or may not be a grave bug, but AFAIK it doesn't apply to
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 01:25:55PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 1:05 -0700]:
apparently the sync option really should *NOT* be used, especially not by
default:
http://readlist.com/lists/vger.kernel.org/linux-kernel/22/111748.html
This may or may not be a
Hi!
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 4:38 -0700]:
I read the thread and it convinced me to change the pmount default
from sync to async (which would be a trivial change) and replace the
--async option with a --sync option. The advantages (don't destroy
flash hardware and greatly speed up the
also sprach Martin Pitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005.05.18.1732 +0200]:
- Mount devices 'async' by default instead of 'sync'. This
will avoid physical damage of flash chips due to exaggerated
updating of inode/FAT structures and greatly speed up the
write throughput. On the bad
On Wed, May 18, 2005 at 05:32:34PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
Hi!
Steve Langasek [2005-05-18 4:38 -0700]:
I read the thread and it convinced me to change the pmount default
from sync to async (which would be a trivial change) and replace the
--async option with a --sync option. The
12 matches
Mail list logo
