[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:0.106 / U:2.472 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site