xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: JFS is going into 2.4? What about XFS in 2.5.?

To: Olaf Frączyk <olaf@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: JFS is going into 2.4? What about XFS in 2.5.?
From: Steve Lord <lord@xxxxxxx>
Date: 20 Aug 2002 13:16:16 -0500
Cc: linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1029867556.2336.37.camel@venus>
References: <1029867556.2336.37.camel@venus>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 2002-08-20 at 13:19, Olaf Frączyk wrote:
> Hi I found in 2.4.20-pre4 changelog something like this:
> 
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>   o JFS: Initial import of version 1.0.18 for Linux 2.4
> 
> Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>   o JFS: Fix structure alignment problem on 64-bit machines
>   o JFS: Add hch's copyright
>   o JFS: sanitize ->clear_inode, remove ->put-inode
>   o Fix races in JFS threads
>   o JFS: Yet another truncation fix
>   o JFS does not need to set i_version.  It is never used
>   o JFS: fix fsync
>   o procfs entries should be created when CONFIG_JFS_STATISTICS is set
>   o JFS: set s_maxbytes to 1 byte lower
>   o Rework JFS's inode locking
>   o JFS: Dynamically allocate metapage structures
>   o Remove d_delete calls from jfs_rmdir & jfs_unlink
>   o JFS: Fix handling of commit_sem
>   o Add resize function to JFS
>   o fix typo in fs/jfs/resize.c
>   o JFS: Replace depreciated initializer syntax with C99 style
>   o JFS: Trivial fixes
> 
> Could you do a web page describing status of integrating XFS into
> kernel?
> It would be great to have it in 2.4 (may be marked as experimental?)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Olaf Fraczyk
> 

I will let Christoph respond on that one, but I do not think we will
be doing a web site. No one has the time to keep updating something.

Steve

-- 

Steve Lord                                      voice: +1-651-683-3511
Principal Engineer, Filesystem Software         email: lord@xxxxxxx


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