[ snip ]
>> One of of the things which Microsoft finally learned was that
>> solutions that depend on everyone running the same operating system,
>> both clients and servers, just aren't going to cut it. That's why
>> they've started embracing Internet protocols. And if Windows, with its
>> huge user base, wasn't able to hack it, Linux certainly won't be able to
>> win with a Linux-only networking filesystem solution.
>>
>> If someone wants to try, they are of course welcome --- it's a
>> free country, and people can spend their time on whatever they want. I
>> simply suggest that there are probably much better ways that a good
>> kernel hacker might spend their time.
>
>On the other hand, a solution developed on Linux using the free-software
>model is not going to be a proprietary solution. Available source code can
>help in acceptance.
>
>If there is no good, non-proprietary solution available, there's nothing
>wrong with developing a portable solution under Linux. If NFS simply won't
>cut it, you design something that will. That's what RFC's are for....
I would also assume ext2fs to be a non-standard filesystem. Of course,
the situation with a disk FS is very different from a network FS, since you
have to deal with multiple types of machines connected to the network as
opposed to a stand-alone computer performing whatever disk I/O it takes to
store and retrieve data. Still, I believe that a better NFS might catch on
well if source code is available for investigation and research.
>lilo
--Arthur