On Tue, 6 Jun 2000, Andrew Lenharth wrote:
> > What stops you from creating a ReiserFS-patched kernel to be distributed as
> > a (non-standard) .deb?
>
> Why non-standard?
Because RFS doesn't belong in the kernel yet.
> Anyway, potato (the soon to be released debian) already suffers from a
> plentifor of specially pached kernel. -idepci, -ide, -compact, as well
> as way to many seperate paches.
That's a distro issue, not the kernel's problem.
> This doesn't change the fact that not being in the kernel means yet
> another release without any real choice of main filesystems in the
> default kernel.
Ext2 generally does the job perfectly well. If you have unusual special
requirements, you should be prepared to make unusual special arrangements.
> Not being in the kernel directly causes users not to have a choice
> which filesystem they use.
Not being in the kernel directly prevents users seeing it and thinking
it's ready for use. It isn't ready for inclusion yet.
> And NO, most users don't patch and compile their own kernels and
> filesystem tools.
Users who don't modify the kernel to suit their needs have no reason to go
using a non-standard partially tested filing system.
> > Strange. I've seen no end of reasons why ReiserFS is _not_ ready for the
> > kernel right now... you must be reading another l-k than I do.
>
> reiserfs is a well tested filesystem used in production enviroments.
It hasn't undergone proper kernel inclusion testing yet. It should be
included in a devel kernel for several revisions before appearing in a
release series kernel - and it has missed the boat for 2.3, so it'll have
to wait for 2.5. After it's been in 2.5 for a while, maybe it can be
backported to 2.4.
> It has VERY responsive developers. It is the only real alternative to
> ext2 right now.
We don't need a replacement for ext2 desperately enough to risk throwing
big wedges of new code into a kernel which is in the final release
preparation stages.
> None of the other journalling filesystems will be ready for 2.4.
That applies to RFS as well.
> You know that. reiser is ready now.
No, it missed the boat.
> Hans et al have said they would be happy to work on a shared
> journalling subsystem.
Most of what he has said involved complaints about Alan being a RedHat
saboteur, trying to force RFS into a merger with ext3...
> In 2.5 and reiser4.
That's where RFS should be integrated into the kernel.
> That is in the future, when we are looking at at least 3 stable
> journalling fs. Right now, there is only one.
No, there are none ready for inclusion in 2.4. They all missed the boat,
including RFS.
James.
-
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 - 21:00:28 EST