Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Jan 1999 01:03:18 +0100 | From | Kurt Garloff <> | Subject | Re: Draft6 |
| |
I agree on most of your comments. Just to comment on two of them:
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 09:39:55AM -0500, jmm@raleigh.ibm.com wrote: > - "supporting up to 64-bit processor systems" > > just wrong... gotta drop the "-bit" part... any OS (just about) can run > on 64-bit processors, we want ppl to know we can run on 64 different > processors in one machine... a huge difference :)
I don't know if the author wanted to stress, that Linux, unlike NT, is able to properly support 64bit processors or if he refered to SMP capabilities.
> - "With compatibility for BSD and Windows NT filesystems" > > may dishonestly imply r/w capability to NTFS (or is that a new feature?) > the original phrasing including the "read" capability was better, unless > this phrase is meant to refer to samba as the upgrade path
From linux/fs/Config.in: tristate 'NTFS filesystem support (read only)' CONFIG_NTFS_FS if [ "$CONFIG_NTFS_FS" != "n" -a "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" = "y" ]; then bool ' NTFS read-write support (experimental)' CONFIG_NTFS_RW fi
AFAIK, it really works, so the "experimental" rather means that it's not tested to a degree we want filesystems to be tested and that it was not made by studying internal NTFS docu, as it was not provided by M$.
Regards, -- Kurt Garloff <kurt@garloff.de> [Dortmund, FRG] Plasma physics, high perf. computing [Linux-ix86,-axp, DUX] PGP key on http://www.garloff.de/kurt/ [Linux SCSI driver: DC390]
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |