On Thu, Aug 10, 2000 at 10:14:43PM +0200, Martin Dalecki wrote:
> > > Please could you have another "accident" and add reiserfs,
> > > then?
> Please DON'T have this accident! There are JFS and XFS on the way - both
> are more proven in the real world and there is a *much* higher wight
> behind them.
But that's no reason to keep ReiserFS out of the kernel at the moment---just
because it's not the perfect solution doesn't mean it's got no merit at all.
Back around Linux 1.0, the kernel had multiple conventional filesystems
(minixfs, xiafs, extfs, ext2fs); ext2 has since become the preferred
filesystem, but it wasn't immediately obvious that that it was the best
choice back then.
The main reason I'm pushing for ReiserFS is that it's in a suitable state to
be merged now. ext3 was almost there last time I looked (a couple of months
ago), so it's probably also ready now. The sooner that these filesystems get
merged, the easier it'll become to work on a common journalling layer and
work out the remaining problems with VM interaction (which affect both ext3
and reiserfs).
--Adam "and, incidentally, UFS is much more proven in the real world than ext2, and I don't see anyone getting too worked-up about that" Sampson azz@gnu.org
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 21:00:27 EST