On 12/5/18 12:06 AM, Kubilay Kocak wrote:
On 5/12/2018 9:51 am, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote:
Starting with FreeBSD 12 we fully support writing ext4 filesystems
Can we remove '2' from the module/man/etc name if (since) it supports
multiple extXfs versions? Is there anything serious preventing it?
Bad idea: neither us or linux support the old extfs format. It is a
common misconception that ext3 or ext4 are different filesystems: they
are both extensions over the ext2 format and they were always intended
to work like that.
You can currently create plain ext2 filesystems on FreeBSD and add
ext3/4 features on top and it will work just fine. The distinction on
linux about ext2/3/4 is rather accidental: they didn't master Version
Control in time to branch instead of forking the implementation a couple
of times. It also seems like ext3 disappeared.
Seems minor but I think worth it for discovery/pola/obviousness, and a
good time (early in the 13.0 cycle).
We get a lot of user questions about ext*fs support on FreeBSD and
pointing to an ext2fs man page also feels a bit weird.
This has to be "fixed" through documentation. I will admit that I
haven't been working properly on the documentation, other than trying to
remember some details in the Wiki page.
Happy to get/organise a !committer contributor to take care of this if
no-one wants to pick it up.
I will be glad to review/commit manpage changes that make things
clearer. We should probably even try to document the format, as I recall
we do for FAT somewhere(?).
Pedro.
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
