From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 21 20:39:26 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3523D16A40B; Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:39:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A5C913C467; Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:39:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bright@elvis.mu.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1192) id 080341A4D83; Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:39:26 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:39:25 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20070221203925.GH25032@elvis.mu.org> References: <200702152208.l1FM8aY7002188@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070216073206.C83539@fledge.watson.org> <20070216085810.GB55867@garage.freebsd.pl> <20070216100310.J83539@fledge.watson.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070216100310.J83539@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek , cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/hpfs hpfs_vfsops.c hpfs_vnops.c src/sys/fs/msdosfs msdosfs_vfsops.c msdosfs_vnops.c src/sys/fs/ntfs ntfs_vfsops.c ntfs_vnops.c src/sys/fs/nullfs null_vfsops.c null_vnops.c src/sys/fs/udf udf.h udf_vfsops.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:39:26 -0000 * Robert Watson [070216 02:05] wrote: > > On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > > >Those changes break API or only ABI? My change break ABI backward > >compatibility, but I thought it will be good to leave API compatibility so > >3rd party file systems (eg. from ports) have time to catch-up. If this is > >not necessary, I'll remove it right away. > > I'd rather we forced the breakage sooner, as ports may not get fixed if > they don't get broken. :-) Doing it now maximizes the amount of time for > these changes to settle, and mean that new work will be done to the new > APIs. If there were MFC plans for this, then having compatibility APIs in > the MFC is important, of course. Since there appears to be only one non-core (for now) fs that needs this facility it's a bit surprising that it can't be made to be compatible. The old VFS_VPTOFH macro could just return EOPNOTSUP for filesystem consumers that use it on non-supporting filesystems. Filesystems that don't need the new VOP version could make use of a default op that just calls the old style VFS operation. Not that is has to be done this way, but I'm just saying, there was little need to kneecap our third party developers. :) -- - Alfred Perlstein