> On another topic, it looks like I may have to run Linux in addition to
> NetBSD in the near future, as I want to run some software that will
> likely be ported to Linux but not to *bsd.  It would be great if I
> could share at least one partition between the two systems.  As far as
> I know, there is no filesystem, other than MS-DOS (eeek!), that is
> common to both.  This is most sad.  How hard would it be to hack the
> linux filesystem into the BSD kernel?  I might be tempted to try this.

Why not hack the FFS into linux? The way I see it, we have:
    Unix type		Primary FS type
    ---------		---------------
    Most SVR4, *BSD	BSD 4.x Fast File System
    Linux		Ext2fs, Extfs, etc.

The former exists just about everywhere, and has been proven stable
over the last ten years. The linux FS's took a while to get stable,
and may change in the future. And, if linux could read BSD FFS
partitions, then interoperability between linux and other (possibly
commercial) unices would be easier.

(I.e, I'm suggesting the easier path to take WRT getting an
interoperable Linux <--> rest_of_unix FS up and running, besides
MS-DOS)


> I've also wondered if it might be possible to add the hacks to the
> MS-DOS filesystem that Microsoft has put into NT 3.5 and that will be
> in Windows 4.0^H^H^H95 that allow for long, multicase file names.
> This would be just barely tollerable.  These changes are documented in
> the new book on the NT filesystem or in the Windows 95 book, I forget
> which.

I dunno if this would be worth the effort - I use the ms-dros FS to
copy stuff off my dos partition that I've downloaded using a dros
terminal emulator (since tip(1) shits me at times :)

-- 
Luke Mewburn, <lm@cpr.itg.telecom.com.au>
`Think of it as Evolution in Action.' - "Oath of Fealty", Niven & Pournelle