From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans Reiser Subject: Re: I request inclusion of reiser4 in the mainline kernel Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:08:25 -0700 Message-ID: <4331D9D9.4060501@namesys.com> References: <200509182004.j8IK4JNx012764@inti.inf.utfsm.cl> <432E5024.20709@namesys.com> <20050920075133.GB4074@elf.ucw.cz> <43301FA0.7030906@slaphack.com> <20050920175727.GA17820@thunk.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <20050920175727.GA17820@thunk.org> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Theodore Ts'o Cc: David Masover , Pavel Machek , Horst von Brand , thenewme91@gmail.com, Christoph Hellwig , Denis Vlasenko , chriswhite@gentoo.org, LKML , ReiserFS List Theodore Ts'o wrote: >On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 09:41:36AM -0500, David Masover wrote: > > >>And personally, if it was my FS, I'd stop working on fsck after it was >>able to "check". That's what it's for. To fix an FS, you wipe it and >>restore from backups. >> >> > >If that's Reiser4's philosophy, just make sure you tell all of your >prospective users about ahead of time. Is it really an explicit goal >that performance is so important beyond all other considerations that >it's OK if the filesystem is extremely fragile and that if anything >goes wrong, you have to wipe things and recover from backups?!? > >I just want to make sure that's the official word and reflects the >official philosophy of the reiser4 designers before I start telling >users that this is a good reason to avoid reiser4 like the plague. > > Ted, please acknowledge that you read my email replying to David. I know you'd really like to get going with the FUD, but..... David is a Reiser4 user, not a developer, and while he is usually very savvy and over modest, we all make mistakes in what we say, and this was his turn.