Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 23 Apr 2007 03:56:00 +0000 (GMT) | From | William Heimbigner <> | Subject | Re: Question about Reiser4 |
| |
> 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 icxcnika@mar.tar.cc
- 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/
| |