Re: The argument for fs assistance in handling archives (was: silent semantic changes with reiser4)

viro
2004-09-03T02:50:20Z

On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 12:11:33AM +0200, Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 11:06:40PM +0100, viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 03, 2004 at 12:02:42AM +0200, Frank van Maarseveen wrote:
> > > > a) kernel has *NO* *FUCKING* *KNOWLEDGE* of fs type contained on a device.
> > >
> > > excuse me, but how does the kernel mount the root fs?
> >
> > By trying all fs types it has registered in a more or less random (OK, defined
> > by order of fs type registration, which is kinda-sorta deterministic at
> > boot time) order. With no flags, unless you pass them explicitly in kernel
> > command line. Fs types list can also be set explicitly in the command line.
>
> Of course I know that: the point is, the kernel _has_ knowlegde contrary
> to what you blatantly said.

What knowledge does the kernel have about fs type that could deal with the
contents of given device? Details, please.