Re: [PATCH/RFC] Delete JFFS (version 1)

[David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>]

On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 07:06 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On 12/12/06, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> > Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > On 12/12/06, Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
> > >> I have created the 'kill-jffs' branch of
> > >> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jgarzik/misc-2.6.git that
> > >> removes fs/jffs.
> > >>
> > >> I argue that you can count the users (who aren't on 2.4) on one hand,
> > >> and developers don't seem to have cared for it in ages.
> > >>
> > >> People are already talking about jffs2 replacements, so I propose we zap
> > >> jffs in 2.6.21.
> > >
> > > I'm usually all for killing broken code, but JFFS isn't really broken
> > > is it?  Is there some burden it's causing by being in the kernel at
> > > the moment?
> >
> > It's always been the case that we remove Linux kernel code when the
> > number of users (and more importantly, developers) drops to near-nil.
> >
> > Every line of code is one more place you have to audit when code
> > changes, one more place to update each time the VFS API is touched.
> 
> Ok, I can buy that.
> 
> >
> > When it's more likely to get struck by lightning than encounter
> > filesystem X on a random hard drive in the field, filesystem X need not
> > be in the kernel.
> 
> Or flash chip in this case ;)

More to the point, people have occasionally actually _used_ JFFS instead
of JFFS2. I'm all for removing it now.

-- 
dwmw2

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/