| To: | Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS for 2.4 |
| From: | Jeremy Jackson <jerj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 02 Dec 2003 11:13:43 -0500 |
| Cc: | Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.44.0312020858320.13692-100000@xxxxxxxxxx> <1070379282.82397.29.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020623 Debian/1.0.0-0.woody.1 |
I think the dislike is justified. XFS is kind of like an alien parasite
attached to Linux. IRIX's IO system is different, it's taken a lot of
changes. I still think it is the best filesystem with a lot of unused
potential though. I hope it will eventually be well integrated -
2.6/2.8. It's only the generic code changes we need to worry about
though, right?
Regards, Jeremy Jackson Russell Cattelan wrote: On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 05:18, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:[snip]Also I'm not completly sure if the generic changes are fine and I dont like the XFS code in general.Ahh so the real truth comes out. Is there a reason for your sudden dislike of the XFS code? or is this just an arbitrary general dislike for unknown or unstated reasons? |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS for 2.4, Jeremy Jackson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS for 2.4, Austin Gonyou |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS for 2.4, Russell Cattelan |
| Next by Thread: | RE: XFS for 2.4, Murthy Kambhampaty |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |