Re: state or future of LFS?

[Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%rek.tjls.com@localhost>]

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 01:06:36PM +0000, gilbert.fernandes%orange.fr@localhost 
wrote:
>
> LFS is probably gonna be replaced by this work under Wasabi
> patronage. Code is robust, clean, and I have moved my home farm
> for storage under netbsd beta where it was first available. Works
> as fine as LFS and does not panic like LFS does when free space on
> filesystem is close to none (close to none for users, as some are
> reserved for root).

Journalled FFS is not a replacement for LFS.  It has approximately
one-half the write throughput under a workload that continuously
creates small files, for example.

Wasabi is out of business.  Nothing is going to happen "under Wasabi
patronage" ever again.

That said, WAPBL is much more suitable than LFS for most users simply
because it actually *works*.

Thor