[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 12:35:17AM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 09:06:14PM +0000, Andrew Doran wrote:
> > Looking at the bigger picture, the NetBSD project would be better served by
> > euthanizing LFS
> Are you planning to unilaterally remove it too?
You're being a bit previous, aren't you?
> > and bringing in a similar technology with a known working
> > and maintained implementation, such as ZFS or HAMMER.
> Neither ZFS nor Hammer is a log-structured file system. Or at least,
> as far as I know ZFS isn't; Hammer's design seems to keep changing.
I was alluding to COW as opposed to in-place update.
> I think the important structural question going forward is whether we
> should continue to pretend that it works to have lfs and ffs share the
> ufs code.
ufs has another consumer, ext2fs. From that standpoint it's more of an
aesthetic concern than anything else.
Main Index |
Thread Index |