Re: XFS and journalling filesystems
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
24 May 1999 06:04:26 GMT
Followup to: <37449574.93F56466@stud.umist.ac.uk>
By author: Edward Thomas <mcai7et2@stud.umist.ac.uk>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> In light of the recent announcement by SGI (that the core of the XFS
> journalling filesystem will be opensourced this summer) what is "the
> panel's" view of the continuing devlopment of ext3/whatever the linux
> jfs will be called. Should we adopt XFS as the defacto replacement for
> ext2?
>
> Of course this is all dependant on SGI coming through and releasing the
> source under a kernel friendly licence agreement (GPL seems sensible to
> prevent plundering by Sun/HP et al.) but whatever the outcome, the open
> sourcing of commercial technologies (opposed to applications), whatever
> they are is cool.
>
It doesn't make sense to "adopt a defacto replacement" until it is IN
the kernel and WORKS. Expect that conversion of the kernel interface
from IRIX to Linux to require at least some amount of pain. Linux
standardization should be technology driven. Furthermore, ext2 will
have to be supported more-or-less indefinitely because of the huge
installed base.
-hpa
--
"The user's computer downloads the ActiveX code and simulates a 'Blue
Screen' crash, a generally benign event most users are familiar with
and that would not necessarily arouse suspicions."
-- Security exploit description on http://www.zks.net/p3/how.asp
-
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/