* Re: linux-cifs-client Digest, Vol 42, Issue 1
[not found] <20070501101821.44AFA16386A@lists.samba.org>
@ 2007-05-01 17:33 ` Steve French (smfltc)
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Steve French (smfltc) @ 2007-05-01 17:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-cifs-client, linux-kernel, jengelh
> what also puzzles me... almost every filesystem that's not at revision 1
> anymore (ext2/3/4, reiser4, smb2) does not have the usually omnipresent "fs"
> suffix anymore (cf. reiserfs, smbfs).
> Maybe it's time to drop all the "fs" suffixes? :)
For the case of cifs (and nfs and afs) the "fs" is part of the name of
the protocol ("common internet file system [protocol]") but for the
other filesystems I agree that it seems redundant to put "fs" in the
name (with a few exceptions e.g. "GFS2" would sound strange if named
"G2" or "global2", and OCFS2 is presumably a product name).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2007-05-01 17:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20070501101821.44AFA16386A@lists.samba.org>
2007-05-01 17:33 ` linux-cifs-client Digest, Vol 42, Issue 1 Steve French (smfltc)
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox