Re: state or future of LFS?

[Antti Kantee <pooka%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 08:35:54PM +0000, Andrew Doran wrote:
> > 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.

ext2fs doesn't really use ufs.  The routines it actually does use
should more or less be genfs than ufs.  I wouldn't be too worried
about letting ufs go, although I have to admit it's a theoretically
nice concept.