Re: sys_mount cleanup

david parsons (o.r.c@p.e.l.l.p.o.r.t.l.a.n.d.o.r.u.s)
14 Jun 1999 12:19:13 -0700

In article <linux.kernel.199906121014.MAA06320@wsdw01.win.tue.nl>,
Guest section DW <dwguest@win.tue.nl> wrote:
>>>Linux 1.0.0 had some backward compatibility with a sys_mount() which
>>>expected only 3 arguments, not 5. Would anyone care very much if this
>>>compatibility were to simply go away without warning in 2.3?
>
>> What's the advantage in doing this?
>> it will drop a whopping 64 instructions out of the kernel.
>> Leave it in ...
>
>(i) The info part: this magic 0xC0ED flag was added in 0.96c-patch1
>(thus in 1992, not 1994).
>
>(ii) The opinion part: removing the test for 0xC0ED will give us
>16 more flag bits to be used with the mount system call.
>No doubt people will find use for those.
>
>
>> when they drag their ancient MCC setups out
>
>Do you still have a clean MCC distribution?

Several, as a matter of fact. The one on the Compaq 386 is not
particularly clean, but MCC lived long enough to make it onto some
of the Yggdrasil archives. The most recent one I have is a Winter
1997 archive that says that it's got 1.0+ on it.

(It's not a joke about dragging the ancient MCC setups out, either.
This compaq 386 is being used for backwards compatability testing of
various of my e820 patches, and I'm going to put a 2.2 (or 2.3 :-()
kernel on it this evening so I can update the fancy e820 patch for
testing and possible inclusion in the baseline kernel.)

____
david parsons \bi/ 1997! It's amazing how something can last that long...
\/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/