Re: [PATCH][2/2] SquashFS

[Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>]

Hi!

> > > >Also, this filesystem seems to do the same thing as cramfs.  We'd need to
> > > >understand in some detail what advantages squashfs has over cramfs to
> > > >justify merging it.  Again, that is something which is appropriate to the
> > > >changelog for patch 1/1.
> > > 
> > > Well, probably Phillip can answer this better than me, but the main 
> > > differences that affect end users (and that is why we are using SquashFS 
> > > right now) are:
> > >                           CRAMFS          SquashFS
> > > 
> > > Max File Size               16Mb               4Gb
> > > Max Filesystem Size        256Mb              4Gb?
> > 
> > So we are replacing severely-limited cramfs with also-limited
> > squashfs... For live DVDs etc 4Gb filesystem size limit will hurt for
> > sure, and 4Gb file size limit will hurt, too. Can those be fixed?

...
> but if there is a contribution from the outside - it is not taken "as is" and maybe fixed up, which
> should be nearly possible in the same time like analysing and commenting the code - it ends up
> in having less supported hardware. 
> 
> imho if a hardware company does indeed provide us with opensource drivers, we should take these
> things as a gift, not as a "not coding guide a'like" intrusion which
> has to be defeated.

Remember that horse in Troja? It was a gift, too.
									Pavel

-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!