Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 15 Mar 1996 11:35:35 -0700 | From | Nelson Minar <> | Subject | Re: Is anyone using EXT FS |
| |
>>>Can we get rid of the ext fs? >>The ext filesystem is useful as a reference, to show where ext2 came >>from, and illustrate what to avoid when creating a filesystem.
I admit I sort of like this attitude, that the source code is meant to be a historical document. I'm not sure it's practical, though.
mrodin@imsa.edu writes: >no one is suggesting that the ext fs should be thrown away permanently >or any such nonsense. in fact, there is no reason why all the old kernel >segments shouldn't still be available somewhere. but the source distribution >doesn't need to include them all.
Awhile ago there was a discussion about whether more things could be distributed as loadable modules. The consensus seemed to be that stuff used in Linux should all be put in one tar file, because it makes it easier to keep everything up to date.
Here's an example where having a separate kernel module distribution would be perfect. Only people who really want to see the old ext filesystem code would get it. And, if it is true that the ext filesystem hasn't even been updated to stuff in quite awhile, then the argument about keeping everything up to date doesn't apply.
| |