On Fri, 7 Sep 2001, Fabrice FACORAT wrote:
> what ?
> I believed that there was too many changes in the core kernel ? or are we
> going to have 3 kernel ? kernel2-2.2.19 kernel-2.4.8-xymdk and
> kernel-xfs-2.4.8zmdk ?
>
> If we got 3 kernel, are you going to find enough place to put everything in
> it ?
Yes, I know I can search the lkml myself, but does anyone have a good link
to whether or not these changes are a problem?
I read an article in which the creator of ReiserFS seemed to say that XFS
by far was the best journaling filesystem for Linux. He put in a good word
about ext3, but this is only because he didn't want to step on any toes.
When 8.1 comes out I am going to reformat just to get XFS in palce of
ReiserFS, and I don't plan on using ext3, because the reason for its use
is only a political one. RedHat and the kernel developers are guilty of
this, and Mandrake ais s well. Until ext3 is stable and starts winning on
some benchmark tests why should anyone use it outside of politics?
I don't want to start a flame war, and I am glad that Mandrake provides
the user with choices for journaling filesystems, but I don't like when
politics take the place of technical superiority. This is what all
Microsoft products seem to do to their competitors. I am not a filesystem
developer, so I personally cannot lay claim to which is best, but I have
read reviews and benchmarks of journaling filesystems, as well as e-mails
from RedHat talking about why they chose ext3, and I understand the major
reason to be politics. And since Mandrake chooses ext3 simply because
RedHat does (RedHat compatibility), then they are guilty of these same
politics.
--
Sincerely,
David Walluck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
