From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755849AbYIOPmf (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:42:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754083AbYIOPmY (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:42:24 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.236]:41278 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755563AbYIOPmX (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:42:23 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=D/jBuVxdk2cOMkbYl+UX35YDF43vqegm7QPLcJSUKra4IYBwqQpuc3t9LNzPy4PR7H OIeYRvPwyOSOQyx/87PT8+35v45PuAQssiljvv2sqOIArZ9EVi3JYt6d1uWLb9kF7/7g URFzN8jbtrd1m6tlxZVrnaeDQkw8TG62MUjYA= Message-ID: <6934efce0809150842j475935b2o342db9e2ff1328fb@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 08:42:21 -0700 From: "Jared Hulbert" To: "Tomas M" Subject: Re: advantages of AXFS over squashfs? Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <48CA386C.609@slax.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48CA386C.609@slax.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I read somewhere that AXFS is going to be a part of Linux kernel 2.6.28 > ( http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS6179099416.html?kc=rss ) > > What are the advantages of AXFS compared to squashfs? Depends on what you are doing and what features you care about. You can read some of the threads starting ~Aug 20th for the details. > Why not to include squashfs instead? To be clear, the submission of AXFS has nothing at all to do with squashfs. It's not a || it's an && operation. But yeah, Christoph is right. 2.6.28 is iffy for AXFS anyway.