Re: XFS in the main kernel

["J.A. Magallon" <jamagallon@able.es>]

On 2002.04.23 Martin Knoblauch wrote:
>Stephen Lord wrote:
>> 
>> Martin Knoblauch wrote:
>> 
>> >
>> > definitely. Unless XFS is in the mainline kernel (marked as
>> >experimantal if necessary) it will not get good exposure.
>> >
[...]
>
> From a mainline point of view XFS on Linux will only be successfull if
>it is "in the kernel". Fully maintained and "Linus approved". I am not
>sure when SGI started the port (could even go back to the time when I
>worked for them, late 1997). Definitely quite some time. By now it
>should be in the kernel. Maybe marked "experimental". As I see it now
>EXT3, ReiserFS and maybe JFS are just eating the XFS lunch away.
>
> In any case, the Vanderbilt comment is right on.
>

If XFS is so good (i do not doubt it), I see some issues (plz correct me
if I'm wrong...):

- XFS needs substantial changes in the VFS layer to work
- This changes are good (or make xfs so good)
- *THE THING* to do is to integrate this changes in mainline tree VFS,
  so XFS will stop duplicating half the kernel code.

Why those features are not merged ? Incompatibilities ? Licensing ?
Religious wars about some way of doing things ?

Plz, if SGI splits XFS in small chunks and starts feeding linus with
changes in the VFS, what will happen ? Why that doesn't happen ?

Just some ideas...

-- 
J.A. Magallon                           #  Let the source be with you...        
mailto:jamagallon@able.es
Mandrake Linux release 8.3 (Cooker) for i586
Linux werewolf 2.4.19-pre7-jam6 #2 SMP mar abr 23 16:56:56 CEST 2002 i686