On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Marc Lehmann wrote:
>Reiserfs has journaling code and ext2 has journaling code. The kernel does
>not have journaling code. Hans thinks that he is pressed into waiting for
>the kernel journaling code done mostly be other people, when reiserfs'
>code is already better in many cases.
With generic journalling code you could journal FAT16. We don't have ext2
RAID, vfat RAID, and reiserfs RAID. Shouldn't journalling be considered
similiarly in purpose to RAID?
So would you want to maintain 5 different journal code systems, all with
their own bugs, problems, incompatibilities and divided optimization
attention? Putting them all together into one nice package like RAID does
would simplify life and reduce code duplication. The whole
'zlib-copy-of-the-week' thing annoys me but not enough yet. :)
>Although Alan claims that there is no problem whatsoever, it is "obvious"
>to many people that strange things are going on, and I think Alan could
>care more instead of keeping more or less quiet on reasons, while claiming
>they are honest.
I think Alan's responses have been more than helpful so far. He's already
said repeatedly that he wants Linus to make the call, so why the badgering?
>All the reasons I read so far on why reisers should keep out of the kernel
>were very vague, and it is also not clear to me wether the architecture of
>reiserfs requires too many ugly changes to the kernel.
I heard of buffer2.c being a copy of buffer.c but I would certainly hope
that issue is non-existant now and only a figment of the past.
-George Greer
-
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 - 21:00:25 EST