Current-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: state or future of LFS?

On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 11:21:25PM +0000, Wouter Klouwen wrote:
 > AFAICT, the LFS implementation is suffering from trying to tie it into FFS.
 > Given the fact it's a completely different concept to FFS, that was probably
 > not a good thing to do.
 > [...]
 > Is it not possible to have some sort of modular framework for file systems
 > (perhaps as LKM), which provides for some of the basic FS operations?
 > This could be used to maximise code sharing and minimise bugs, yet avoid
 > trying to tie different FSes into a commonality they don't have. 

That's what sys/ufs/ufs is *supposed* to be. Too bad it doesn't really
work that way.

(We also have sys/miscfs/genfs, which is another approximation from
the other end.)

This kind of structural stuff is hard to get right, and each failed
try makes the problem only that much worse...

David A. Holland

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index