From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Huey (hui) Subject: Re: silent semantic changes with reiser4 Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 14:33:31 -0700 Message-ID: <20040827213331.GA4468@nietzsche.lynx.com> References: <412D9FE6.9050307@namesys.com> <200408261812.i7QICW8r002679@localhost.localdomain> <20040827203216.GC1284@nysv.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Markus T?rnqvist , Horst von Brand , Hans Reiser , Andrew Morton , hch@lst.de, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, flx@namesys.com, reiserfs-list@namesys.com, bhuey@lnxw.com Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com To: Linus Torvalds Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 27, 2004 at 01:38:28PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > Heh. Considering that WinFS seems to be delayed yet more, I don't think > that's a very strong argument. Which is another argument, and bragging rights, to integrate something like Reiser FS4. :) > Hell will freeze over before Microsoft does a filesystem right. Besides, > WinFS is likely almost in user mode anyway, ie mostly a library, rather > like the gnome people are already doing with nome storage. They're trying to push their low level storage model into the kernel after they saw how slow their userspace version of that is. It makes sense to have this kind of stuff directly apart of a lower level FS later > So there's really no point in trying to push your agenda by trying to > scare people with MS activities. Linux kernel developers do what's right > because it is _right_, not because somebody else does it. I tried to stay out of this thread, but I couldn't resist after this post. :) MS has other problems, namely, they're a large company trying to basically replicated Apple's (NeXT) OS X stuff, but onl 10x larger and slower than it is. It's really silly what's going on with MS development as well as the greater open source X community. The sooner folks realize that all rendering models are moving in the direction of Apple's OS X, the sooner they can just flat out rip it off. It's going to require both kernel and userspace changes for this to happen. bill