[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH][2/2] SquashFS
    Pavel Machek wrote:

    >[I'm not sure if I should further feed the trolls.]
    >>>Yes, it *is* rather unfair. Sorry about that. But having 2 different
    >>>limited compressed filesystems in kernel does not seem good to me.
    >>what do you need e.g. reiserfs 4 for? or jfs? or xfs? does not ext2/3
    >>the journalling job also?
    >>is there really a need for cifs and samba and ncpfs and nfs v3 and nfs
    >>v4? why?
    >Take a look at debate that preceded xfs merge. And btw reiserfs4 is
    >*not* merged.
    >And people merging xfs/reiserfs4/etc did address problems pointed out
    >in their code.
    > Pavel
    i do not know if i act like a troll - i think a troll is something
    totally different.

    yes of course i know xfs or e.g. the kernel version named debate. but -
    seriously - is it worth spending
    so many time to discuss instead of just fixing the code meanwhile?
    that is the main problem also in some other open source projects.
    discussing instead of developing - not really efficient.

    ps. FYI no, i am not a troll, and i am also taking part in some open
    source projects contributing code.


    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 14:11    [W:3.181 / U:0.024 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site