> A question for the guys at SGI that are working so hard on this beast:
> With the fundamental differences regarding implementation, in particular the
> invasiveness of the XFS patches, and the talk now of possibly targeting 2.6
> rather than 2.5, what's the general take on (1) capitulation to the Linus
> and AC viewpoint about reducing the invasiveness by taking out some of the
> code that dupes functionality in the kernel but does it differently and (2)
> longevity of the XFS project in light of the industry's less than stellar
> financial condition as a whole?
So where is this discussion going on? Because it is happening in a forum
I don't see.
As for code duplication - there is maybe one operation which has major
overlap - xfs_rename. If we take out code in the mainline kernel then we
loose about half of what XFS can do and might as well go home anyway.
Steve
|