Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 06:44:46AM -0600, Michael Best wrote:
>
>>My discussions with some of the Gentoo developers there seems to be a
>>number of them that have/had experienced data loss in the past and I
>>think some of them have a problem that it only journals metadata.
>
>
> Some of their patches/patch combination almost guarntee data loss.
> I wouldn't trust gentoo for throw-away bk repo :)
Just curious which of their patches/patch combinations were the worst?
They have a separate xfs_sources available, and since keeping XFS out of
their main tree anyways, I think I'll just stick to trying to get things
like newer xfsprogs into their package system and perhaps a couple of
things (like rml preempt) into their xfs kernel sources.
I was also hoping to get their maintainer to build a weekly CVS snapshot
kernel (as there appears to be a weekly XFS-patch snapshot) that would
be masked/hidden, just in case developers wanted to test things.
Other than the gcc-3.2 - O_DIRECT on i586 problem I know about I am
using an XFS CVS kernel from a couple of weeks back. (using athlon so
I'm not affected by the O_DIRECT problem)
-Mike
|