Subject: Re: SGI XFS filesystem
To: Chris G. Demetriou <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Andrew Brown <email@example.com>
Date: 05/28/1999 21:43:11
>> how's this then: if changes are made to ext2fs (or ntfs, or any of the
>> "non-native" fs types), we (netbsd, that is) will have to play catch
>> up. but if changes are made to ffs or lfs, that's changes that we (by
>> definition) already have, so there's no catch up period.
>Really? So, if FreeBSD or BSDI adds some nifty feature to FFS that
>changes the on-disk format it magically appears in our source tree?
no...and i think you know what i mean. :P
>Or, as another example, how 'bout that softdep code.
>Certainly we don't _have_ to catch up, but neither do we have to catch
>up with changes in FAT-family file systems or in ext2fs!
yes, i know. we don't have to. but isn't in our interest to do so?
>If you're going to use that metric, at this point probably the _only_
>file system that would qualify as 'native' is LFS... Does anybody
>else have that up and going?
not that i know of.
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
firstname.lastname@example.org * "ah! i see you have the internet
email@example.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
firstname.lastname@example.org * "information is power -- share the wealth."