From: "J.A. Magallon" <jamagallon@able.es>
To: m.knoblauch@TeraPort.de
Cc: Stephen Lord <lord@sgi.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: XFS in the main kernel
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 23:37:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020423213750.GA1704@werewolf.able.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3CC56355.E5086E46@TeraPort.de> <3CC56FE9.1080303@sgi.com> <3CC581F5.2FBEA0C1@TeraPort.de>
On 2002.04.23 Martin Knoblauch wrote:
>Stephen Lord wrote:
>>
>> Martin Knoblauch wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > definitely. Unless XFS is in the mainline kernel (marked as
>> >experimantal if necessary) it will not get good exposure.
>> >
[...]
>
> From a mainline point of view XFS on Linux will only be successfull if
>it is "in the kernel". Fully maintained and "Linus approved". I am not
>sure when SGI started the port (could even go back to the time when I
>worked for them, late 1997). Definitely quite some time. By now it
>should be in the kernel. Maybe marked "experimental". As I see it now
>EXT3, ReiserFS and maybe JFS are just eating the XFS lunch away.
>
> In any case, the Vanderbilt comment is right on.
>
If XFS is so good (i do not doubt it), I see some issues (plz correct me
if I'm wrong...):
- XFS needs substantial changes in the VFS layer to work
- This changes are good (or make xfs so good)
- *THE THING* to do is to integrate this changes in mainline tree VFS,
so XFS will stop duplicating half the kernel code.
Why those features are not merged ? Incompatibilities ? Licensing ?
Religious wars about some way of doing things ?
Plz, if SGI splits XFS in small chunks and starts feeding linus with
changes in the VFS, what will happen ? Why that doesn't happen ?
Just some ideas...
--
J.A. Magallon # Let the source be with you...
mailto:jamagallon@able.es
Mandrake Linux release 8.3 (Cooker) for i586
Linux werewolf 2.4.19-pre7-jam6 #2 SMP mar abr 23 16:56:56 CEST 2002 i686
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-23 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-23 13:36 XFS in the main kernel Martin Knoblauch
2002-04-23 14:30 ` Stephen Lord
2002-04-23 15:47 ` Martin Knoblauch
2002-04-23 21:37 ` J.A. Magallon [this message]
2002-04-23 9:23 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-24 9:32 ` Luigi Genoni
2002-04-23 15:47 ` Peter Wächtler
2002-04-23 15:55 ` Martin Knoblauch
2002-04-23 21:43 ` Luigi Genoni
2002-04-23 9:32 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-24 7:13 ` Martin Knoblauch
2002-04-24 9:02 ` Luigi Genoni
[not found] <20020422234419.GQ2470@dstl.gov.uk>
2002-04-23 8:31 ` Tony Gale
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-22 15:10 Dan Yocum
2002-04-21 15:29 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-04-22 16:55 ` Wichert Akkerman
2002-04-22 22:19 ` Matthias Andree
2002-04-22 22:47 ` Chris Mason
2002-04-22 23:29 ` Keith Owens
2002-04-22 23:44 ` Wichert Akkerman
2002-04-23 0:43 ` Luigi Genoni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020423213750.GA1704@werewolf.able.es \
--to=jamagallon@able.es \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lord@sgi.com \
--cc=m.knoblauch@TeraPort.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox