> > > Both HFS and QNXFS has been in the kernel for quite some time, yet both
> > > are flagged Experimental.
> > >
> > > Is this still the case? Are they considered more unstable than other
> > > filesystems in the kernel? If they are considered unstable, HFS should
> > > be made if [ "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" ] ...
> >
> > I've used both and yes they are both still buggy and should remain marked
> > as such. Is anybody still actively maintaining them?
>
> HFS has a maintaier and seems pretty much rock solid in 2.2. The QNXfs is
> still very experimental. Its a read only "solves the migration from QNX
> to Linux" file system - no more.
My suggestion then would be to remove (EXPERIMENTAL) from HFS and let it
stay for QNXfs. Comments, anyone?
/David Weinehall
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
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/