> > > changes we might be making for XFS. Note however that XFS itself
> > > is not part of the kernel but rather a loadable module. The terms
> >
> > Well, to be able to claim all that good-will that steams from words
> > like donation and open-source,
> > I really hope the module will be released in SOURCE form.
> > A binary module doesn't strike me as particulary exiting nor flexible
> > enough to gain required momentum..
> >
> > /Fredrik Lundholm
> > exce7@ce.chalmers.se
>
> As our press announcement said, XFS will be released in open source.
> That does not contradict/preclude its being structured as a loadable
> module. XFS is a pretty large file system (100k+ lines of code) and
> it wouldn't be reasonable for something that large to be statically
> linked with the kernel, as there are probably lots of applications
> and configurations that don't need its capabilities.
No. Our kernels are configurable, so you can select what components
you want to have in your kernel. It is something that predates
modules. [So yes, even if ext2 is normally compiled into kernel, I can
select in config that I want it out, or I can select that I want it as
module. Please retain same options for xfs.]
And you definitely _do_ want XFS compiled into kernel, because fs for
your / partition has to be compiled in. It would be very bad if I had
to have small ext2 partition there just for insmoding xfs, what do you
think?
Pavel
-- I'm really pavel@ucw.cz. Look at http://195.113.31.123/~pavel. Pavel Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!- 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/