<div>hi jan,</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
>...should i use the patched one - or have the patches been rolled into the<br>
>upstream/main version? i notice that the latest fuse<br>
>on <a href="http://download.gluster.com/pub/gluster/glusterfs/fuse/" target="_blank">http://download.gluster.com/pub/gluster/glusterfs/fuse/</a> is 2.7 - while my<br>
>distro is now upto 2.8.5.<br>
<br>
</div>The glfs patches have not made it into the kernel (determined by looking<br>
at the source), but that may have other reasons:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg22731.html" target="_blank">http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg22731.html</a><br>
<a href="http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg22867.html" target="_blank">http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-nfs/msg22867.html</a></blockquote><div><br></div><div>thats interesting. is there an official response to this from gluster? it would be great to have this issue resolved - as patching only complicates installs. </div>
<div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">OBS also has glusterfs-3.2.4 in /filesystems.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div><div>i'm not sure what this sentence means - good or bad! :)</div><div><br></div><div>-p</div><div><br></div><div>ps - i was reticent to upgrade to 3.2 and am currently on the 3.1.6 branch. i'd be keen to hear if 3.2.x is considered more stable than 3.1.6. if so, i'll be happy to upgrade. also, be good to hear the official word on this.</div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div>