On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Chase Venters wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2006, Alex Tomas wrote:
>
> would "#if CONFIG_EXT3_EXTENTS" be a good solution then?
Let's put it this way:
- have you had _any_ valid argument at all against "ext4"?
Think about it. Honestly. Tell me anything that doesn't work?
Now, granted, I really do agree with you about the whole code sharing thing.
A fresh start is often just what you need. I'm just questioning if it
wouldn't be better to do this fresh start immediately after going 48-bit,
rather than before. That way, existing users that want that extra umph can
have it today.
Let me clarify that I don't have a final answer or opinion for whether or
not 48-bit belongs in ext3 or ext4. But I'm trying to illustrate that it's an
important question to raise.
In Group A we have some number of users that must have 48-bit support by
Date B. 48-bit support could be available in ext3 by Date A, before Date
B. It could also be available in ext4 by Date X, along with a handful of
other features.
Is Date X before Date B? If it's not, is it worth telling Group A to
suffer for a while, or asking them to use ext4 before it's ready? These
are the questions I'd have to know the answers to if I were the one
casting a final decision.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
