Hi Joshua, Thanks for forwarding the discussion to bug-hurd.
Just to clarify, my questions were specifically about GEFS and the technical feasibility of porting it to GNU Hurd, rather than whether ext3 or ext4 might be better alternatives. Since GEFS was the filesystem originally proposed, I thought it would be worthwhile to examine its architecture, consistency guarantees, and compatibility with Hurd before considering an implementation. Thanks to NexusSfan as well for pointing out Hurd's translator architecture. That certainly provides a useful starting point, although the complexity of the port would depend on GEFS's internal dependencies. Best regards, Alperen Erkan On Sun, Nov 1, 2026 at 9:25 PM NexusSfan <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/1/26 10:15 AM, jbranso--- via Bug reports for the GNU Hurd wrote: > > I'm just forwarding your email to bug-hurd. Let's keep the discussion > on the mailing list eh? > > > > And I really do not have any answers to your questions. I'm not a Hurd > developer. :( > > > > Maybe is some ways ext3/4 is better that gefs. Though I don't think > ext3/4 has snapshots... > > > > Joshua > > With Hurd, you don't need to have your own filesystem to be upstreamed, > because of translators. > > I assume that if the gefs driver is less than 1000 lines like you > mentioned, it should be somewhat easy to create your own Hurd translator > for it. > > Of course, if you want the Hurd to boot from gefs there are some extra > steps you need to do. > > -- > NexusSfan > GNU.org - Please support free software. > > >
