Re: (reiserfs) Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggestsdelaying reiserfs integration)

From: Hans Reiser (hans@reiser.to)
Date: Mon Jun 05 2000 - 16:06:56 EST


One more refinement of our format handling policy needs mentioning. We will
call unstable versions of reiserfs not "reiserfs" but "reiser4".
This is in part because I am tired of waiting for ext2.fsck every time I crash
the latest code I added to reiserfs, and in part because it makes everything
easier if we only have to merge format supports every 18 months. I don't think
"reiserfs" should be unstable during all of 2.5, I think "reiser4" should be
unstable during all of 2.5. A stable "reiserfs" is needed more by kernel
hackers than anyone else. I expect a significant productivity impact from
kernel hackers being able to double the number of times per hour that they can
crash the kernel because of journaling.:-)

Just to repeat:

"reiser4" will be aged in a dark cellar for 18 months until 2.6 is almost ready,
then it will be merged into reiserfs. All formats for "reiserfs" will be
eternally supported. ReiserFS 3.6 for Linux 2.4 supports ReiserFS 3.5
journaling formats. It does not convert formats until you tell it to using the
"-conv" mount option. We are backporting ReiserFS 3.6 from Linux 2.4 to Linux
2.2+LFS so users of 2.2 can get 64 bit support. Only crazy people will use
rather than just test "reiser4" during 2.5 before it is merged into "reiserfs".
"reiserfs" will have no disk format changes during 2.4, and will always be
stable code.

Hans

Stephen Frost wrote:
>
> On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
>
> > Linux development kernels have so much rope for a stupid user to hang
> > themselves with that I frankly don't care when they try to do that without
> > reading the documentation.
> >
> > I disagree to keep a needed an useful feature out of 2.4 for the sake that
> > users may shot themselves in the feet when upgrading to the next development
> > series.
>
> 2.4->2.5 it might be okay to break things, but they should be working
> to go from 2.4->2.6... Which is to say, a stable kernel to another stable
> kernel. I suppose you could have it broken during all of 2.5, but that would
> seem rather silly since it should be working in 2.6 really..
>
> Stephen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Jun 07 2000 - 21:00:23 EST