Stephen Borrill <netbsd@precedence.co.uk> writes:
> I thought I'd err on the side of safety. Plus, I remember Wolfgang Solfrank
> having the following to say back on 23/3/98, though I think he misunderstood
> the issues: 
> [ ... ]

I don't see why this is really any different than, say, adding GEMDOS
FS support to the MS-DOS FS for the atari (though i think they're
stuffed in there in a suboptimal way), or even adding Rock Ridge
support to cs9660.

Rock Ridge, for instance, adds a bunch of "stuff" and even causes file
name munging (ooh, ahh!).  "why couldn't people just use native
ISO-9660!"  (Yes, it's a useful, popular format.  but then, it sounds
like the acorn changes are useful and popular in the circles in which
you swim...)


Are the changes and other specialness documented by some external
authority?  If so, that probably ought to be cited.


cgd
-- 
Chris Demetriou - cgd@netbsd.org - http://www.netbsd.org/People/Pages/cgd.html
Disclaimer: Not speaking for NetBSD, just expressing my own opinion.