Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 9 Jan 2001 04:48:34 +0100 | From | David Weinehall <> | Subject | Re: FS callback routines |
| |
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:12:24PM +0000, Michael D. Crawford wrote:
[snipped a lot of sane opinions] > While Be, Inc.'s implementation is closed-source, the design of the > BFS (_not_ "befs" as it is sometimes called) is explained in Practical > File System Design with the Be File System by Dominic Giampolo, ISBN > 1-55860-497-9. Dominic has since left Be and I understand works at > Google now.
The reason why BFS is often referred to as BeFS, is that there is a another file-system, far older than Be's filesystem AFAIK, called BFS; the SCO Unixware Boot File System, which is already supported in the Linux-kernel. Hence the misnomer BeFS. I think we should keep it that way to avoid confusion... After all, BeFS does indicate pretty well what file-system we mean, and other alternatives, such as be_bfs, or renaming SCO BFS to sco_bfs or similar feels awkward.
/David Weinehall _ _ // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\ // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |