I'm a total idiot. Please forgive my stupidity.
From a purely technical perspective, what does VFS lack that makes
VFS-modules so much harder than Reiser-modules?
Thanks,
--TongKe
On Sun, 6 Aug 2006, David Masover wrote:
Lexington Luthor wrote:
Bernd Schubert wrote:
An alternative might be a reiser4 fuse port. Has some advantages:
Please please no. The kernel people will use that as an argument for
keeping it out of the kernel.
They'll use anything as an argument for keeping it out of the kernel. This
one is particularly shallow, especially if we still have the kernel version,
because the performance difference will be significant.
If it isn't, maybe it is time for things like FUSE to take us in the
direction of microkernels...
I want reiser4 to be popular enough to make my apps depend on it and not
have the users complain about having to use an obscure fs.
Well, an obscure program (FUSE) is probably a lot easier to convince users of
than an obscure filesystem (reiser4 in-kernel).
Besides, the only thing about reiser4 that interests me more than XFS or
reiserfs is the speed.
That's you. There are other reasons to like it.
But I agree with you in that I don't think it's worth the resources to do a
FUSE port, especially when there is (again) NO guarantee that anything we do
will get us in the kernel, so better to do things that will either get us
users anyway (like distro inclusion) or do things the kernel people
specifically ask for.
