Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Bonding\-announce\]\s+\[PATCH\s+SET\]\[bonding\]\s+cleanup\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Bonding\-announce\]\s+\[PATCH\s+SET\]\[bonding\]\s+cleanup\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 00:28:17 +0200; I strongly agree. I have been facing this problem and it was really a pain. I used the last bonding version which didn't define the ABI version, together with the associated ifenslave, but when the; /archives/netdev/2003-10/msg00132.html (9,585 bytes)
2. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: has@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:47:19 -0400; I'm a bit concerned about doing some of this stuff in the 2.4 series. That compatibility stuff is there for a reason, and was set to be removed in 2.6. Perhaps we shouldn't be doing stuff this drast; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg00743.html (11,607 bytes)
3. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: ms <chas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:11:53 +0300; That's the word I got from Jay in response to the " [Kernel-janitors] old ioctl definitions in 2.5" thread. --; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg00745.html (10,422 bytes)
4. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: iams <chas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:33:31 -0700; [removed bonding-announce from cc:] My thinking here is that any ifenslave old enough (two years or more) to still be using the OLD ioctl values is unlikely to work with the current kernel driver, an; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg00746.html (10,899 bytes)
5. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: ad N. Tindel" <chad@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:43:40 +0300; I think I better leave this for Amir to answer. He's our ABI expert and this needs carefull consideration, especially now that he's working on enhancing ifenslave's capabilities for the hot operation; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg00747.html (10,602 bytes)
6. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:13:00 -0400; I was specifically told by David Miller that we are not to break binary compatibility within a 2.4 release. Such things had to wait until 2.5 or later. We can not require a user to upgrade their ife; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg00756.html (11,442 bytes)
7. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: Willy TARREAU <willy@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2003 00:28:17 +0200; Hi ! I strongly agree. I have been facing this problem and it was really a pain. I used the last bonding version which didn't define the ABI version, together with the associated ifenslave, but when; /archives/netdev/2003-10/msg00874.html (9,877 bytes)
8. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: "Chad N. Tindel" <chad@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:47:19 -0400; I'm a bit concerned about doing some of this stuff in the 2.4 series. That compatibility stuff is there for a reason, and was set to be removed in 2.6. Perhaps we shouldn't be doing stuff this drast; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg01672.html (11,698 bytes)
9. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: Shmulik Hen <shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:11:53 +0300; That's the word I got from Jay in response to the " [Kernel-janitors] old ioctl definitions in 2.5" thread. --; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg01674.html (10,520 bytes)
10. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 10:33:31 -0700; [removed bonding-announce from cc:] My thinking here is that any ifenslave old enough (two years or more) to still be using the OLD ioctl values is unlikely to work with the current kernel driver, an; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg01675.html (10,983 bytes)
11. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: Shmulik Hen <shmulik.hen@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 20:43:40 +0300; I think I better leave this for Amir to answer. He's our ABI expert and this needs carefull consideration, especially now that he's working on enhancing ifenslave's capabilities for the hot operation; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg01676.html (10,672 bytes)
12. Re: [Bonding-announce] [PATCH SET][bonding] cleanup (score: 1): Author: "Chad N. Tindel" <chad@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 17:13:00 -0400; I was specifically told by David Miller that we are not to break binary compatibility within a 2.4 release. Such things had to wait until 2.5 or later. We can not require a user to upgrade their ife; /archives/netdev/2003-09/msg01685.html (11,597 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]