Doug Wicks wrote:
How do I get off the mail list here?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
See www.namesys.com, click on Join Mail List then in Unsubscribe
Mailinglist and follow instructions.
Very difficult, i know.
Horst von Brand wrote:
Hans Reiser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
I think the exokernel approach by Frans is a very interesting approach.
I wish I had the experience with it necessary to know if it was
effective. I do NOT take the position that name resolution should be in
the kernel. I
Jonathan Briggs wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 23:44 -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
Hubert Chan wrote:
And a question: is it feasible to store, for each inode, its parent(s),
instead of just the hard link count?
Ooh, now that is an interesting old idea I haven't considered in 20
You are not a member of this mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED].
If you know the general guide of this list, please send mail with
the mail body
guide
to the address
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
where guide is equal to GUIDE for case insensitive.
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 05:54:46PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
Which would neither need VFS changes nor be dependent on Reiser4 in
any way, so I don't see why this thread lives on. Just get down to
business and implement this metafs =)
I've been gone for a while and suddenly drowning in
Dir Sir/Ms:
Sorry to boring you!
We are big chinese state import and export corporation,supply you high quality
import and export service. We have ourself mold factory and model design
workroom and electronic assemble workshop. We are main supply you the high
quality AV+IT production from china
Hi, I am the fml mailing list manager for [EMAIL PROTECTED].
Hmm, you may be not a member.
1. Your mail may come from a bad address which is not
registered in this mailing list
2. Your mail has a syntax error.
If you would like to subscribe this mailing list
subscribe YOUR NAME
Hello
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 07:25, Joshua Wise wrote:
Hi folks,
I just set up a new system, and all was well, but on a boot of the
system a few days later, I was greeted with reiserfsck complaining that
the number of free blocks was incorrect, and that it wished to run
itself with
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jul 7 07:36:14 2005
Received: from mtl-smtpgw2.global.avidww.com (mtl-smtpgw2.global.avidww.com
[172.24.33.104])
by paperboy.global.avidww.com (8.12.9/8.12.6) with ESMTP id
j67BaEvQ015031
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Thu, 7 Jul 2005 07:36:14 -0400
Received:
Markus Törnqvist wrote:
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 05:54:46PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
Which would neither need VFS changes nor be dependent on Reiser4 in
any way, so I don't see why this thread lives on. Just get down to
business and implement this metafs =)
I've been gone for a while
ScanMail for Microsoft Exchange has detected virus-infected attachment(s).
Sender = reiserfs-list@namesys.com
Recipient(s) = Schön, Volker
Subject = Report
Scanning time = 07.07.2005 16:42:15
Engine/Pattern = 7.510-1002/2.717.00
Action on virus found:
The attachment letter.zip contains
Your mail to 'Elec-trak' with the subject
Delivery reports about your e-mail
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
Your request to the Elec-trak mailing list
Posting of your message titled Delivery reports about your
e-mail
has been rejected by the list moderator. The moderator gave the
following reason for rejecting your request:
No reason given
Any questions or comments should be directed to the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hans Reiser wrote:
Jeff, are you sure that you need this code to exist? Here are the
problems I see:
for the average case, it is suboptimal. The seeks to the bitmaps
are far more expensive than the averaged cost of keeping them in ram.
Hi
This is an auto-response to your mail to the Gauteng Linux User's
group address, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please save this message, as
re-sending to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] address will not re-send it!
The Glug list was split into two separate lists on the 1st
June 2003. For more information, please
I agree w/ Jeff 100%. I'm not a kernel hacker, simply a user. As a
matter of fact, I was one of those people that Jeff aluded to when he
said: There have been reports of large filesystems taking an
unacceptably long time to mount.
On 7/7/05, Jeff Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hey all -
Just out of curiousity, does anyone outside of Chris and I have
outstanding patches against ReiserFS? I ask because the tree has been
relatively stable for some time and I wonder if it may be time to submit
a Lindent patch to clean up the
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
Hey all -
Just out of curiousity, does anyone outside of Chris and I have
outstanding patches against ReiserFS? I ask because the tree has been
relatively stable for some time and I wonder if it may be time to submit
a Lindent patch to clean up the code and reformat it
Hello
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
Hey all -
Just out of curiousity, does anyone outside of Chris and I have
outstanding patches against ReiserFS?
I have no idea how the attached patch managed to not get included.
I ask because the tree has been
relatively stable for some time and I wonder if it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote:
Hello
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
Hey all -
Just out of curiousity, does anyone outside of Chris and I have
outstanding patches against ReiserFS?
I have no idea how the attached patch managed to not get included.
Hello
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
Vladimir V. Saveliev wrote:
Hello
Jeff Mahoney wrote:
Hey all -
Just out of curiousity, does anyone outside of Chris and I have
outstanding patches against ReiserFS?
I have no idea how the attached patch managed to not get included.
Interesting. I guess
Le Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:59:35 -0400, studdugie [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I agree w/ Jeff 100%. I'm not a kernel hacker, simply a user. As a
matter of fact, I was one of those people that Jeff aluded to when he
said: There have been reports of large filesystems taking an
unacceptably long time
Pierre Etchemaïté wrote:
Le Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:59:35 -0400, studdugie [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit :
I agree w/ Jeff 100%. I'm not a kernel hacker, simply a user. As a
matter of fact, I was one of those people that Jeff aluded to when he
said: There have been reports of large filesystems taking
Your mail to 'thelist' with the subject
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
notification of the
David Masover wrote:
Pierre Etchemaïté wrote:
Le Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:59:35 -0400, studdugie [EMAIL PROTECTED] a
écrit :
I agree w/ Jeff 100%. I'm not a kernel hacker, simply a user. As a
matter of fact, I was one of those people that Jeff aluded to when he
said: There have been reports of
On Thursday 07 July 2005 02:45, Hans Reiser wrote:
Jeff, are you sure that you need this code to exist? Here are the
problems I see:
for the average case, it is suboptimal. The seeks to the bitmaps
are far more expensive than the averaged cost of keeping them in ram.
It would be good
Your mail to 'ubuntu-devel' with the subject
Returned mail: Data format error
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
Post by non-member to a members-only list
Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive
On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 12:52:52AM -0400, Jeffrey Mahoney wrote:
It's possible to read the bitmaps in a delayed fashion, but the
problem of completely wasted resources is still not addressed. I feel
the correct solution is to let the buffer cache do its job and not
assume that any particular
28 matches
Mail list logo
