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

• Previous message: The Doctor What: "Re: Hot pluggable CPUs ( was Linux 2.5 / 2.6 TODO (preliminary) )"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggests delaying reiserfs"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, Jun 05, 2000 at 03:34:54PM +0200, Richard Torkar wrote:
> Please give some good reasons why applying reiserfs in 2.4.* would be a
> good idea. And I don't mean that sarcasticly I mean it out of curiousity.

One advantage would be that it would be easier for reiserfs to track changes
in the mainline kernel (because people making changes to the rest of the
kernel can more easily see how they might break reiserfs). I personally
intend to move to ext3 (for backwards compatibility reasons), but I'd rather
see both reiserfs and ext3 merged as soon as possible---both are more stable
than, for instance, ufs or ntfs, which are both in the mainline kernel
despite regularly munching filesystems. The EXPERIMENTAL flag is there for a
reason, after all...

-- 
Adam Sampson
azz@gnu.org
-
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/

• Next message: Chris Mason: "Re: memory pressure callbacks (was: 2.5 TODO)"
• Previous message: The Doctor What: "Re: Hot pluggable CPUs ( was Linux 2.5 / 2.6 TODO (preliminary) )"
• Next in thread: Alan Cox: "Re: New Linux 2.5 - 2.6 TODO (Alan Cox suggests delaying reiserfs"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jun 06 2000 - 18:59:58 EDT