[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC][patch] filesystem: Vmufat filesystem, version 4
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 08:00:29AM +0100, Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-04-14 at 06:59 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> > This file system is tied directly to the VMU. Assumptions about the
> > on-disk format, block numbering limitations, etc. are all VMU
> > constraints, and papering over that in the Kconfig text is not
> > sufficient. This file system is and always will be tied to the VMU, and
> > you really do not want to decouple the two. What you do in loopback mode
> > for testing is your own business, but this will not work in the way
> > people expect on a fixed disk. You are only making things harder on
> > yourself by insisting that this is somehow generic.
> >
> > The file system at least wants a dependency on the VMU (and I suppose
> > mtdblock) itself.
> Why won't it work on a fixed disk "in the way people expect"? Granted
> they'd be eccentric to format a disk in this way but there is no
> inherent reason why this file system *has* to be tied to a VMU.
Everything about the on-disk format is tied to the VMU. Until that sinks
in, don't bother sending me email, thanks.

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-04-14 09:11    [W:0.055 / U:6.580 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site