* Re: 2.3.whatever and hfs
@ 1999-10-15 6:55 Lou Langholtz
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Lou Langholtz @ 1999-10-15 6:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
Has anybody picked up UFS then to implement it under 2.3+? I'm asking
cause if I can manage to download and build the latest 2.3 from
cvs.on.openprojects.net, I'll try hacking HFS if nobody else has already
started/done the work. Thanks.
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* 2.3.whatever and hfs
@ 1999-09-21 1:54 David Riley
1999-09-21 3:23 ` David D. Kilzer
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Riley @ 1999-09-21 1:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linuxppc-dev
The current vger 2.3 kernel (whatever it is, maybe 2.3.18) compiles
without a hitch, except at the end when it's linking it all up and it
dies with an unresolved symbol "update_vm_chache" in hfs.o. I'd like to
be able to use hfs with my 2.3 kernel; is there a fix for this?
Also, I noticed that the duplicate Mach64 entry in the console drivers
config bit has been removed. Thanks so much to whomever did that!
--
--"Your mouse has been moved. Windows 95 must be restarted for change
to take effect."
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.3.whatever and hfs
1999-09-21 1:54 David Riley
@ 1999-09-21 3:23 ` David D. Kilzer
1999-09-21 6:05 ` Sriranga Veeraraghavan
1999-09-21 6:17 ` Martin Costabel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: David D. Kilzer @ 1999-09-21 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: happyoscar42; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
David Riley <happyoscar42@usa.net> wrote:
>The current vger 2.3 kernel (whatever it is, maybe 2.3.18) compiles
>without a hitch, except at the end when it's linking it all up and it
>dies with an unresolved symbol "update_vm_chache" in hfs.o. I'd like to
>be able to use hfs with my 2.3 kernel; is there a fix for this?
Yes. Someone must rewrite the HFS code to use the new unified buffer code.
I think both minixfs and ext2fs have been rewritten, but HFS and other
'foreign' file systems have not been rewritten.
The short-term solution is not to include support for HFS in your kernel.
The long-term solution is to fix HFS to work with the new unified buffer
code. Unfortunately, the HFS maintainer is busy and may not be able to fix
this until well into 2.4.
Personally, I think that, "if you break it, you fix it," but apparently
this doesn't always apply to kernel internals.
Dave
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.3.whatever and hfs
1999-09-21 3:23 ` David D. Kilzer
@ 1999-09-21 6:05 ` Sriranga Veeraraghavan
1999-09-21 6:17 ` Martin Costabel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sriranga Veeraraghavan @ 1999-09-21 6:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David D. Kilzer; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
> Yes. Someone must rewrite the HFS code to use the new unified buffer code.
> I think both minixfs and ext2fs have been rewritten, but HFS and other
> 'foreign' file systems have not been rewritten.
I haven't been keeping up with 2.3 developments.
What is the unified buffer code? Is it a set of new API's for the vfs
or is there something more to it?
----ranga <ranga@soda.berkeley.edu>
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.3.whatever and hfs
1999-09-21 3:23 ` David D. Kilzer
1999-09-21 6:05 ` Sriranga Veeraraghavan
@ 1999-09-21 6:17 ` Martin Costabel
1999-09-22 12:28 ` Brad Boyer
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Martin Costabel @ 1999-09-21 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: linuxppc-dev
"David D. Kilzer" wrote:
>
> David Riley <happyoscar42@usa.net> wrote:
> >The current vger 2.3 kernel (whatever it is, maybe 2.3.18) compiles
> >without a hitch, except at the end when it's linking it all up and it
> >dies with an unresolved symbol "update_vm_chache" in hfs.o. I'd like to
> >be able to use hfs with my 2.3 kernel; is there a fix for this?
>
> Yes. Someone must rewrite the HFS code to use the new unified buffer code.
> I think both minixfs and ext2fs have been rewritten, but HFS and other
> 'foreign' file systems have not been rewritten.
>
> The short-term solution is not to include support for HFS in your kernel.
>
> The long-term solution is to fix HFS to work with the new unified buffer
> code. Unfortunately, the HFS maintainer is busy and may not be able to fix
> this until well into 2.4.
So in the next stable kernel version, we will not have HFS support and,
of course, even less HFS+ support! Is there really nobody in the
linuxppc developers community who can do this? The current maintainer
has been inactive since 7 months (see the archives from February), so he
could not really object if someone else took over.
> Personally, I think that, "if you break it, you fix it," but apparently
> this doesn't always apply to kernel internals.
And never has applied to the PPC port, unfortunately.
--
Martin
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: 2.3.whatever and hfs
1999-09-21 6:17 ` Martin Costabel
@ 1999-09-22 12:28 ` Brad Boyer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Brad Boyer @ 1999-09-22 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Martin Costabel; +Cc: linuxppc-dev
Martin Costabel wrote:
> So in the next stable kernel version, we will not have HFS support and,
> of course, even less HFS+ support! Is there really nobody in the
> linuxppc developers community who can do this? The current maintainer
> has been inactive since 7 months (see the archives from February), so he
> could not really object if someone else took over.
Well, I started looking at this, but I have so little free time that I may
not have anything sooner than anyone else anyway. I think this is the
problem everyone is having, which isn't really a surprise. If I do manage
to find some free time, I'll work on this, but I don't want to guarantee
anything. If someone else starts work on this, I'll be happy to help. If
noone else gets going on this, it may be a while.
Brad Boyer
flar@pants.nu
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-10-15 6:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1999-10-15 6:55 2.3.whatever and hfs Lou Langholtz
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1999-09-21 1:54 David Riley
1999-09-21 3:23 ` David D. Kilzer
1999-09-21 6:05 ` Sriranga Veeraraghavan
1999-09-21 6:17 ` Martin Costabel
1999-09-22 12:28 ` Brad Boyer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).