Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Dec 2008 09:41:45 -0800 | From | "Justin P. Mattock" <> | Subject | Re: [Tux3] Tux3 report: A Golden Copy |
| |
Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Am Mittwoch 31 Dezember 2008 schrieb Justin P. Mattock: > >> Daniel Phillips wrote: >> >>> On Tuesday 30 December 2008 23:34, sniper wrote: >>> >>>> Great, I have mounted tux3 filesystem under UML with stuffs in this >>>> mail, but I still can't debug it with gdb. Anyone gives me >>>> suggestion? >>>> >>> You just have to give a "cont" command a bunch of times and you will >>> eventually get to a command prompt. The reason for this is, uml uses >>> the segfault interrupt as part of its machine simulation, and there >>> is no exsiting way for uml and gdb to communicate in such a way that >>> uml can recognize that the interrupt came from its own code and >>> filter it. >>> > > [...] > > >> Hmm.. seems like a redundancy; >> Anyways I looked at you're site, but am still >> confused at what tux3 is: what is tux3? >> >> (at first I thought it was a video game, but was wrong); >> can I use tux3 to secure a linux system or is it for >> something else? >> >> > > Hmmm, I thought > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Tux3 is a write-anywhere, atomic commit, btree-based versioning > filesystem. It is the spiritual and moral successor of Tux2, the most > famous filesystem that was never released. The main purpose of Tux3 is to > embody Daniel Phillips's new ideas on storage data versioning. The > secondary goal is to provide a more efficient snapshotting and > replication method for the Zumastor NAS project, and a tertiary goal is > to be better than ZFS. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://tux3.org/ > > was pretty clear. What are you missing? > > Ciao, >
I guess this is what is confusing to me: atomic commit, btree-based versioning.
irregardless about how it's worded, I'm wondering if I should use this mechanism, or not.
regards;
Justin P. Mattock
| |