On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 01:27:25 CDT, David Masover said:
> I back up with rsync, actually.
Doesn't matter what it is. You still need to define sane semantics for
it.. ;)
> Speaking of backup, that's another nice place for a plugin. Imagine a
> dump that didn't have to be of the entire FS, but rat
Hi,
seems one of my server (amd64/bi-opteron) running reiser4 on top of
raid6 software oops-ed this week-end,
here is the output, maybe it's usefull for you.
the config can be downloaded from
http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~mmarcha/config-2.6.12-rc5
tell me if you need more infos.
I will up
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:57:54 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>In one of three possible settings for the imaginary zipfile plugin, yes.
>> But if we're talking about a kernel source tree, how many of us
>>actually build zipfil
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:54:17 CDT, David Masover said:
> There has been some mention of inheritance, but I've forgotten how
> that's supposed to work. If there's some sort of inheritance where
> children inherit properties of their parent directory, and also inherit
> changes to those properties,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Horst von Brand wrote:
> David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>>>Reiser4 plugins are not per user, but per kernel. They are compiled
>>>in. The model is intended to ease the development process, nothing
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Horst von Brand wrote:
> David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Kyle Moffett wrote:
>>
>>>On Jun 26, 2005, at 22:37:48, David Masover wrote:
>
>
> [...]
>
>
>>That just means the zip plugin has to be more carefully written than I
>>thought.
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:57:54 CDT, David Masover said:
> In one of three possible settings for the imaginary zipfile plugin, yes.
> But if we're talking about a kernel source tree, how many of us
> actually build zipfiles/tarballs of their kernel source trees, rather
> than unpack existing ones?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hans Reiser wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
>>>tarball/zipfile. Nobody ever suggested that you would actually want to.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Besides, your point was that you could not run make inside of a kernel
>>
>
> Umm, try it when we have it w
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:31:46 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>*If* we decide that this must go both ways, *then* we either turn off
>>write support inside the zipfile
>
>
> Oh, *that* will do wonders for command symmetry.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:10:43 EDT, Hubert Chan said:
>
>>On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 20:40:29 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
>
>>Reiser4 plugins have to be compiled into the kernel. (They're not
>>plugins in the sense that most
David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > On Jun 26, 2005, at 22:37:48, David Masover wrote:
[...]
> That just means the zip plugin has to be more carefully written than I
> thought. It would have to be sandboxed and limited to prevent buffer
> overruns and zip bombs.
[
On 6/27/05, Horst von Brand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wonderful! I carefully "transparently encrypt" my secret files, so
> /everybody/ can read them! Now /that/ is progress!
All of this side feature argument is completely offtopic for the
inclusion of reiser4, but oh well.
In any case, the rea
David Masover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hans Reiser wrote:
[...]
> > Reiser4 plugins are not per user, but per kernel. They are compiled
> > in. The model is intended to ease the development process, nothing
> > more. Apologies if the naming suggests more.
What do you gain by this? It is j
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:31:46 CDT, David Masover said:
> *If* we decide that this must go both ways, *then* we either turn off
> write support inside the zipfile
Oh, *that* will do wonders for command symmetry. And you just shot down
the whole 'mv foo bar' being equivalent to 'zip bar foo' concep
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:37:48 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>Assume we can do on-disk caching, similar to fscache/cachefs for nfs.
>>Now, benchmark:
>>
>>$ unzip linux-2.6.12.zip && make -C linux-2.6.12
>>
>>versus the hypot
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>tarball/zipfile. Nobody ever suggested that you would actually want to.
>>
>>
> Besides, your point was that you could not run make inside of a kernel
>
Umm, try it when we have it working, on a 1-4GB RAM machine it might not
be so bad. We have the compression
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:10:43 EDT, Hubert Chan said:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 20:40:29 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> > Oh, I'm waiting for the fun the first time somebody deploys a plugin
> > that has similar semantics to 'chmod g+s dirname/' ;)
(You *did* notice it was set-GID of a *directory* no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:37:48 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>>Go read http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s7-7 and ponder until enlightenment arrives.
>>
>>So what? I don't intend to convince anyone based on how much
>>slower/faster
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:37:48 CDT, David Masover said:
> > Go read http://www.tux.org/lkml/#s7-7 and ponder until enlightenment
> > arrives.
>
> So what? I don't intend to convince anyone based on how much
> slower/faster their kernel compiles. It's meant to illustrate the
> principle of the th
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 21:37:48 CDT, David Masover said:
> Assume we can do on-disk caching, similar to fscache/cachefs for nfs.
> Now, benchmark:
>
> $ unzip linux-2.6.12.zip && make -C linux-2.6.12
>
> versus the hypothetical
>
> $ make -C linux-2.6.12.zip/.../contents
>
> This is an automatic
David Masover wrote:
> Hans Reiser wrote:
>
> >David Masover wrote:
>
>
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:58:07 CDT, David Masover said:
> >>
> >>
> "Plugins" is a bad word. This user's combination of plugins is most
> likely identical to other users', it'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kyle Moffett wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2005, at 22:37:48, David Masover wrote:
>
>> $ make -C linux-2.6.12.zip/.../contents
>
>
> I've yet to see how such automatic unzipping does not inherently introduce
> system insecurity into _existing_ applications
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 20:40:29 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:35:48 CDT, David Masover said:
>> The kernel does not decide that. You do. And it doesn't
>> automatically decide that every time you create a file. You have to
>> use some interface to trigger the plugins.
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:35:48 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>>Right. So please explain what crypto/raw/foo and crypto/inflated/foo.gz give
>>>you.
>>
>>In that example (shouldn't have used the name "crypto", but oh well), i
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:35:48 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>>Right. So please explain what crypto/raw/foo and crypto/inflated/foo.gz give
>>>you.
>>
>>In that example (shouldn't have used the name "crypto", but oh well), i
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:54:25 PDT, Hans Reiser said:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > (Hint - work out how long a kernel 'make' would take
> >if you were doing it inside a .tar.bz2).
> >
> >
> After the first time, not very long, if you had enough ram the
> plugin would keep the data uncompr
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:35:48 CDT, David Masover said:
> > Right. So please explain what crypto/raw/foo and crypto/inflated/foo.gz
> > give you.
>
> In that example (shouldn't have used the name "crypto", but oh well), it
> should be crypto/raw/foo.gz and crypto/inflated/foo -- where foo.gz is
>
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 19:16:48 CDT, David Masover said:
> But, to avoid confusion, the inclusion of a crytocompress plugin in a
> given kernel doesn't mean that all files accessed from that kernel are
> encrypted and compressed. It just means that you can pick an individual
> file and set it to be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hans Reiser wrote:
> David Masover wrote:
>
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:58:07 CDT, David Masover said:
>>
>>
"Plugins" is a bad word. This user's combination of plugins is most
likely identical to other users
David Masover wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:58:07 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
> >>"Plugins" is a bad word. This user's combination of plugins is most
> >>likely identical to other users', it's just which ones are enabled, and
> >>which aren't? If they are all inc
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 08:39:01PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>
>>Correct me if I am wrong:
>>
>>What exists currently in VFS are vector instances, not classes. Plugins,
>>selected by pluginids, are vector classes, with each pluginid selecting
>>a vector class. You pro
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> (Hint - work out how long a kernel 'make' would take
>if you were doing it inside a .tar.bz2).
>
>
After the first time, not very long, if you had enough ram the
plugin would keep the data uncompressed until it flushed it to disk.
Performance might even improve s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:58:07 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>"Plugins" is a bad word. This user's combination of plugins is most
>>likely identical to other users', it's just which ones are enabled, and
>>which aren't? If
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 14:58:07 CDT, David Masover said:
> "Plugins" is a bad word. This user's combination of plugins is most
> likely identical to other users', it's just which ones are enabled, and
> which aren't? If they are all included, I assume they play nice.
Which ones are enabled. Exactl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 02:48:06 CDT, David Masover said:
>
>
>>Lincoln Dale wrote:
>
>
>>>this is the WHOLE point of standardization .. i don't think its that
>>>Reiser4's EAs offer any more or less capabilities than standar
Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> Hi Hans,
>
> On 25/06/2005 12:38 a.m., Hans Reiser wrote:
>
>> fsck is better in V4 than it is in V3. Users should move from V3 to V4,
>> as V3 is obsolete. I agree on that Ted.
>
>
> Perhaps before moving to V4, reiser4progs-1.04 (the most recent I
> think) could be made
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 02:48:06 CDT, David Masover said:
> Lincoln Dale wrote:
> > this is the WHOLE point of standardization .. i don't think its that
> > Reiser4's EAs offer any more or less capabilities than standard EAs -
>
> They do. Reiser4's EAs can look like any other object -- files,
> fo
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:46:06 +0100 Christoph Hellwig wrote:
| On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 08:39:01PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
| > Correct me if I am wrong:
| >
| > What exists currently in VFS are vector instances, not classes. Plugins,
| > selected by pluginids, are vector classes, with each plugin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 12:21:52PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
>
>>I seem to remember the comment was more about hardcoded ID tables.
>>
>>And this was the generic ID code database, which is now maintained out
>>of the kerne
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, Alan Cox wrote:
On Gwe, 2005-06-24 at 20:21, Hans Reiser wrote:
Alan, this is FUD. Our V3 fsck was written after everything else was,
for lack of staffing reasons (why write an fsck before you have an FS
worth using). As a result, there was a long period where the fsck c
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 12:21:52PM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> I seem to remember the comment was more about hardcoded ID tables.
>
> And this was the generic ID code database, which is now maintained out
> of the kernel:
>
> /usr/share/misc/pci.ids
> A list of all known PCI ID's (vendors
On Sad, 2005-06-25 at 04:14, David Masover wrote:
> Right, but even if I was a door geek, changing hinges costs more than
> changing code. Now, if I were building a new house and I happened to
Probably not, programmers are expensive 8)
> DVDs are cheap nowdays:
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Pr
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 09:07:00PM +0400, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, could you please specify few exact examples with
> specific file/function names which duplicate the existing
> infrastructure. What do they duplicate and why? How should these
> functions be implemented
On Gwe, 2005-06-24 at 20:21, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Alan, this is FUD. Our V3 fsck was written after everything else was,
> for lack of staffing reasons (why write an fsck before you have an FS
> worth using). As a result, there was a long period where the fsck code
> was unstable. It is reliable
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 02:46:44AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
>
There's been sloppy code in the kernel before. I remember one bit in
particular which was commented "Fuck me gently with a chainsaw." If I
rememb
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
I'm a bit confused about what you're saying here. What does the 'vector'
in all these expressions mean?
In OO terminology our *_operation structures are interfaces. Each particular
instance of such a struct that is filled with function pointers is a class.
Each instanc
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 04:08:49AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> I've been reading a bit of history, and the reason Linux got so popular
> in the first place was the tendency to include stuff that worked and
> provided a feature people wanted, even if it was ugly. The philosophy
> would be: choos
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 02:46:44AM -0500, David Masover wrote:
> >>There's been sloppy code in the kernel before. I remember one bit in
> >>particular which was commented "Fuck me gently with a chainsaw." If I
> >>remember correctly, this had all of the PCI ids and the names and
> >>manufacturers
On Wed, Jun 22, 2005 at 08:39:01PM -0700, Hans Reiser wrote:
> Correct me if I am wrong:
>
> What exists currently in VFS are vector instances, not classes. Plugins,
> selected by pluginids, are vector classes, with each pluginid selecting
> a vector class. You propose to have the vector class lay
Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 12:23:41 -0700, Hans Reiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
assert("trace_hash-89", is_hashed(foo) != 0);
>
>> Lots of people like corporate anonymity. Some don't. I don't. I
>> like knowing who wrote what. ...
>
> For what it's wor
This is a report of a bug filed with gentoo a few weeks ago.
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=95043
Below is the contents of this bug. The kernel that was in place is no more, so no further testing
can be done on this particular machine.
Rob Baxter
Description: [reply]Opened: 2005-0
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lincoln Dale wrote:
>
>
> David Masover wrote:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> Lincoln Dale wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>
>>
>>> this is the WHOLE point of standardization .. i don't think its that
>>> Reiser4's EAs offer an
David Masover wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lincoln Dale wrote:
[...]
this is the WHOLE point of standardization .. i don't think its that
Reiser4's EAs offer any more or less capabilities than standard EAs -
They do. Reiser4's EAs can look like any other
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lincoln Dale wrote:
> David Masover wrote:
>
>> Ok, I'll bite. Hans put it best a moment ago:
>>
>>
> [..]
>
> you seem to have some misconceived notion that this is somehow a
> "ReiserFS versus XFS" or "ReiserFS versus ext3" case.
> l-k could do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lincoln Dale wrote:
[...]
> this is the WHOLE point of standardization .. i don't think its that
> Reiser4's EAs offer any more or less capabilities than standard EAs -
They do. Reiser4's EAs can look like any other object -- files,
folders, symlin
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 6/26/05, Lincoln Dale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
the l-k community have asked YOU may times. any lack of response isn't
because of the kernel cabal .. its because YOU are refusing to entertain
any notion that what Reiser4 has implemented is unpalatable to the
kerne
David Masover wrote:
Ok, I'll bite. Hans put it best a moment ago:
[..]
you seem to have some misconceived notion that this is somehow a
"ReiserFS versus XFS" or "ReiserFS versus ext3" case.
l-k could do without those conspiracy theories. lets just stick to the
facts.
No, as a user,
57 matches
Mail list logo
