[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: silent semantic changes with reiser4

> And as I see it, there are two big issues:

> a) reiser4 extends the Linux API in ways which POSIX/Unix/etc do not
> anticipate and

> b) it does this within the context of just a single filesystem.

> I see three possible responses:

> a) accept the reiser4-only extensions as-is (possibly with post-review
> modifications, of course) or

> b) accept the reiser4-only extensions with a view to turning them into
> kernel-wide extensions at some time in the future, so all filesystems
> will offer the extensions (as much as poss) or

> c) reject the extensions.

> My own order of preference is b) c) a). The fact that one filesystem will
> offer features which other filesystems do not and cannot offer makes me
> queasy for some reason.

This last sentence makes me wonder. Where is Linux heading? The idea
that a FS cannot contain features that no other FS has is very

I am all for uniformity, but not at the expense of shutting down
advanced progress that Linux is so badly needing.

This talk about old UNIX seems like people want to still live in the
70'ies and not look forward. Please wake up!


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.585 / U:1.628 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site