Eric Hopper wrote:
I know that this whole effort has been put in disarray by the
prosecution of Hans Reiser, but I'm curious as to its status.
It was in disarray well before. Many of the reiser4 features,
like filesystem plugins, make more technical sense in the Linux
VFS, but made more business sense for Namesys as a reiserfs 4
thing. That lead to a stalemate.
Shouldn't it be a matter of stability though? Benchmarks suggest that
reiser4 is a good file system; reiser4 is the successor to the
already-accepted reiserfs; we've got experimental ext4 support but no
reiser4 support, etc.
I don't see why something like plugins should matter. If it works enough
to be marked as experimental, why shouldn't reiser4 support be included?
It's a pain for me personally to have to patch any kernel with reiser4
support so I can use the reiser4 fs.
William Heimbigner
[email protected]
-
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]
