From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([131.228.20.170] helo=mgw-ext11.nokia.com) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.63 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1HtPO9-00070U-0I for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 30 May 2007 10:43:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Current status of UBI From: Artem Bityutskiy To: Jacky Lam In-Reply-To: <975540.55285.qm@web53002.mail.re2.yahoo.com> References: <975540.55285.qm@web53002.mail.re2.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Date: Wed, 30 May 2007 17:42:54 +0300 Message-Id: <1180536174.24399.12.camel@sauron> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Reply-To: dedekind@infradead.org List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 07:28 -0700, Jacky Lam wrote: > Currently, I am searching for alternative of NFTL. > I am happy to see that UBI is actively developin. > Could someone tell me the status of UBI? It is usable > now? >=20 > Also, NFTL seems only support flash with page size > 512 only? Is it correctly? Any way to work around > that? It is usable, and it is merged to mainline. It is used in production by some people. We develop a new file-system on top of it (http://git.infradead.org/?p=3Dusers/dedekind/new-ubifs-2.6.git;a=3Dsummary= ) I also quite quickly fix it when I get a bugreport, so it is maintained. But make sure you understand that UBI is _NOT_ FTL. If you dig FAQ (which is partially outdated, but still), you will find explanation why. --=20 Best regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E=D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9 =D0=90= =D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC)