[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Uhhuh.. 2.4.12

Subject: Re: Uhhuh.. 2.4.12
From: "D. Stimits" <stimits@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:56:44 -0600
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <Pine.LNX.4.40.0110111704540.23708-100000@gusi.leathercollection.ph> <20011011045341.96C8B1F9C3@zion.rivenstone.net>
Reply-to: stimits@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Joseph Fannin wrote:
>     Alan and the other kernel developers have stated their reasons why XFS is
> not in any of the official kernels -- largely because the code duplicates too
> many functions already present in Linux.  SGI has their reasons for wanting
> to keep it that way (it's well tested, both on IRIX and now on Linux); the
> kernel developers have their own for not allowing it in the official kernels
> (it's ugly and not the Right Thing.)

I'm curious how much the boot kernel size and required ramdisk would be
reduced with a single set of functions?


D. Stimits, stimits@xxxxxxxxxx

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>