From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Levon Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] libfsimage Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:14:41 +0000 Message-ID: <20061031131441.GA20084@totally.trollied.org> References: <20061027185847.GA15368@totally.trollied.org> <20061031095438.GA20744@york.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061031095438.GA20744@york.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Tim Deegan Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Tue, Oct 31, 2006 at 09:54:38AM +0000, Tim Deegan wrote: > > It also adds Solaris UFS support. The current plugins are all based on > > slightly modified Grub legacy code (so far it's taken about an hour to > > get a new FS from the grub code working). > > >From a quick glance through, the changes you've made to the grub fs code > seem to be mostly eliminating grub's world of static block-access > variables and functions. Could that be abstracted out into a wrapper > file that would let any grub filesystem code be used verbatim? That > would reduce the maintenance load even further (and give us FAT and > ISO9660 for free). That was my initial aim, but translating the FSYS_BUF define into the file-local buffer seemed non-trivial. And I had to make some changes to allow for 64-bit usage; a lot of the grub legacy code is not 64-bit clean :/ I would expect FAT and iso9660 (and ZFS) to be just easy as as the others though, around an hour's work to fix and test... > Alternatively, how far away from stable enough are the grub2 drivers? I spoke to the grub devs; they're still not recommending people use grub2. reiserfs support isn't even integrated and has only just had patches posted, and no-one's ported ZFS yet... regards, john