From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Drebes Subject: Re: cramfs in big endian Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:20:16 +0100 Message-ID: <200711111120.17004.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> References: <200711062216.27156.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <200711102126.57010.lists-receive@programmierforen.de> <473614E8.2010802@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Tomas M , Christoph Hellwig To: "H. Peter Anvin" Return-path: Received: from server001.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.130.9]:34132 "EHLO server001.webpack.hosteurope.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751647AbXKKKUn (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:20:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: <473614E8.2010802@zytor.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org > What about simply deep-sixing cramfs and replacing it with squashfs or > something else? I think this is the long term solution. Cramfs isn't a very beautiful filesystem. It's a good candidate for removal. However, there are still some distributions that use cramfs for initrds. So removing it immediately isn't a good idea. Andi