Subject: Re: Thoughts about wedges
To: Bill Studenmund <email@example.com>
From: Leo Weppelman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 09/29/1999 21:32:14
On Mon, Sep 27, 1999 at 11:38:03AM -0700, Bill Studenmund wrote:
> I guess my big concern with wedges is that we're probably close enough
> with Leo's proposal (if he has patches, which I think he said) to getting
> more than 8/16 partitioning into the kernel in time for 1.5. I think a
> complete implimentation of wedges (seperate major #) would need longer to
> get right. So we're stuck with 8 partitions on most platforms because
> we're shooting for a very tough (to get right, but that's the only way we
> would do it!) goal. :-)
I share your concern. I don't have patches ready. After the amount of
discussion popping up after my first suggestion, I decided that it was
better to flesh things out first before starting to program. Looking back,
I think this decision was the right one. After the wedges were thrown in,
another bunch of things have changed. Currently, I have no idea where the
majority of the people are standing.
A lot of interesting ideas have been brought up and I think that the ideas
in this discussion combined with what I brought up in the 'disklabel part 2'
thread can be moulded to some kind of middle ground. It looks a good idea to
me to try to create this proposal. I am willing to write something up this
weekend. Maybe we should try to work out something together?
I think the next proposal should be voted upon otherwise this looks like its
going to be some endless discussion.