From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 00:37:57 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA15164 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:37:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from send105.yahoomail.com (send105.yahoomail.com [205.180.60.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA15157 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:37:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from farshidoo@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <19981123084020.26824.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com> Received: from [194.225.42.53] by send105.yahoomail.com; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:40:20 PST Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 00:40:20 -0800 (PST) From: Farshidoo Subject: Is LFS operational? To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi everybody, I installed FreeBSD on my computer and tried to use its LFS. I created a file system by newlfs and mounted it by mount_lfs commands. When I tried to touch(1) a file in that file system it stopped and the process remained in 'D+' state. Then I noticed that in one of man pages is written that LFS has problem in FreeBSD. Is it right? What about FFS and its relation with UFS? Is UFS based on FFS? If yes, what is the difference between them? Any comment is appreciated. --Farshid _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 08:36:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA02774 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 08:36:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id IAA02769 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 08:36:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA03350; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:35:29 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id RAA07025; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:35:29 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <19981123173529.Q24412@follo.net> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:35:29 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Farshidoo , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? References: <19981123084020.26824.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <19981123084020.26824.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com>; from Farshidoo on Mon, Nov 23, 1998 at 12:40:20AM -0800 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Nov 23, 1998 at 12:40:20AM -0800, Farshidoo wrote: > Hi everybody, > > I installed FreeBSD on my computer and tried to use its LFS. > I created a file system by newlfs and mounted it by mount_lfs > commands. When I tried to touch(1) a file in that file system > it stopped and the process remained in 'D+' state. Then I > noticed that in one of man pages is written that LFS has problem > in FreeBSD. Is it right? LFS is busted in FreeBSD, and was removed in 3.0. This is due to LFS not tracking the VM changes, if I've understood correctly. > What about FFS and its relation with UFS? Is UFS based on FFS? > If yes, what is the difference between them? UFS is a higher level. Different level of abstraction, sort of. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 08:55:26 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id IAA05501 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 08:55:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gatewayb.anheuser-busch.com (gatewayb.anheuser-busch.com [151.145.250.253]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA05491 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 08:55:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com) Received: by gatewayb.anheuser-busch.com; id KAA07016; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:50:30 -0600 Received: from stlabcexg006.anheuser-busch.com( 151.145.101.161) by gatewayb via smap (V2.1) id xma006758; Mon, 23 Nov 98 10:50:16 -0600 Received: by stlabcexg006.anheuser-busch.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:52:49 -0600 Message-ID: <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF9017766B2@STLABCEXG011> From: "Alton, Matthew" To: "'Eivind Eklund'" , Farshidoo , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: Is LFS operational? Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 10:52:11 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Eivind Eklund [SMTP:eivind@yes.no] > Sent: Monday, November 23, 1998 10:35 AM > To: Farshidoo; freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? > > On Mon, Nov 23, 1998 at 12:40:20AM -0800, Farshidoo wrote: > > Hi everybody, > > > > I installed FreeBSD on my computer and tried to use its LFS. > > I created a file system by newlfs and mounted it by mount_lfs > > commands. When I tried to touch(1) a file in that file system > > it stopped and the process remained in 'D+' state. Then I > > noticed that in one of man pages is written that LFS has problem > > in FreeBSD. Is it right? > > LFS is busted in FreeBSD, and was removed in 3.0. This is due to LFS > not tracking the VM changes, if I've understood correctly. > The LFS should not be used as it is. I think it's also gone in 2.2.7. I'm working on an advanced FS which will superset it nicely. > > What about FFS and its relation with UFS? Is UFS based on FFS? > > If yes, what is the difference between them? > > UFS is a higher level. Different level of abstraction, sort of. > The usage in _UNIX Internals: The New Frontiers_ is FFS for the original BSD Fast Filesystem and UFS for the FFS using the VMS pseudo-OOP interface. > Eivind. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 09:33:04 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA10025 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:33:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.onego.ru (ns.onego.ru [194.84.158.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA10013 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:32:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tiny@onego.ru) Received: from i486.freebsd (d-53.onego.ru [194.84.221.53]) by ns.onego.ru (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA30128; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:30:35 +0300 Message-ID: <36599BBF.15FB7483@onego.ru> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:30:39 +0000 From: Artem Tepponen X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG CC: Farshidoo Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? References: <19981123084020.26824.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Farshidoo wrote: > I installed FreeBSD on my computer and tried to use its LFS. > I created a file system by newlfs and mounted it by mount_lfs > commands. When I tried to touch(1) a file in that file system > it stopped and the process remained in 'D+' state. Then I > noticed that in one of man pages is written that LFS has problem > in FreeBSD. Is it right? Yes, it's broken in any *BSD now, and in 3.0-RELEASE it was removed, at least from userland. > What about FFS and its relation with UFS? Is UFS based on FFS? > If yes, what is the difference between them? You'd better to read /usr/share/doc/smm/05.fastfs/paper.ascii.gz It is about 15 years old, but FFS isn't young anyway. In short: F means Fast, so was the main problem solved by FFS. With best regards, Artem To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 09:34:09 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA10282 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:34:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns.onego.ru (ns.onego.ru [194.84.158.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA10192 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 09:34:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tiny@onego.ru) Received: from i486.freebsd (d-53.onego.ru [194.84.221.53]) by ns.onego.ru (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA30197 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:32:36 +0300 Message-ID: <36599C38.1CFBAE39@onego.ru> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 17:32:40 +0000 From: Artem Tepponen X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.0-RELEASE i386) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: unionfs broken? References: <199811231730.UAA30134@ns.onego.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, all! I have some questions regarding unionfs and mount -o union. Are they broken? Tried to use them both and got kernel panic messages. Is there anybody who's going to fix this? If no, then can somebody give hints about where to start from? With best regards, Artem To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 11:45:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id LAA07992 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 11:45:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from silver.gn.iaf.nl (silver.gn.iaf.nl [193.67.144.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA07987 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 11:45:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from wilko@yedi.iaf.nl) Received: from uni4nn.gn.iaf.nl (osmium.gn.iaf.nl [193.67.144.12]) by silver.gn.iaf.nl (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA20228; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:45:39 +0100 Received: by uni4nn.gn.iaf.nl with UUCP id AA24463 (5.67b/IDA-1.5); Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:17:57 +0100 Received: (from wilko@localhost) by yedi.iaf.nl (8.8.8/8.6.12) id UAA00692; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:11:56 +0100 (CET) From: Wilko Bulte Message-Id: <199811231911.UAA00692@yedi.iaf.nl> Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? In-Reply-To: <19981123084020.26824.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com> from Farshidoo at "Nov 23, 98 00:40:20 am" To: farshidoo@yahoo.com (Farshidoo) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:11:56 +0100 (CET) Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Organisation: Private FreeBSD site - Arnhem, The Netherlands X-Pgp-Info: PGP public key at 'finger wilko@freefall.freebsd.org' X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org As Farshidoo wrote... > Hi everybody, > > I installed FreeBSD on my computer and tried to use its LFS. > I created a file system by newlfs and mounted it by mount_lfs > commands. When I tried to touch(1) a file in that file system > it stopped and the process remained in 'D+' state. Then I > noticed that in one of man pages is written that LFS has problem > in FreeBSD. Is it right? > > What about FFS and its relation with UFS? Is UFS based on FFS? > If yes, what is the difference between them? LFS is heavily intertwined with the VM system. As LFS has not been updated when the VM was redesigned LFS is not working anymore. Wilko _ ______________________________________________________________________ | / o / / _ Bulte email: wilko@yedi.iaf.nl |/|/ / / /( (_) Arnhem, The Netherlands WWW : http://www.tcja.nl ______________________________________________ Powered by FreeBSD __________ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Mon Nov 23 12:08:55 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA10252 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:08:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gjp.erols.com (alex-va-n008c079.moon.jic.com [206.156.18.89]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA10150 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 12:08:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gjp@gjp.erols.com) Received: from gjp.erols.com (localhost.erols.com [127.0.0.1]) by gjp.erols.com (8.9.1/8.8.7) with ESMTP id PAA05114; Mon, 23 Nov 1998 15:08:38 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gjp@gjp.erols.com) To: Wilko Bulte cc: farshidoo@yahoo.com (Farshidoo), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Gary Palmer" Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 23 Nov 1998 20:11:56 +0100." <199811231911.UAA00692@yedi.iaf.nl> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1998 15:08:38 -0500 Message-ID: <5110.911851718@gjp.erols.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Wilko Bulte wrote in message ID <199811231911.UAA00692@yedi.iaf.nl>: > LFS is heavily intertwined with the VM system. As LFS has not been updated > when the VM was redesigned LFS is not working anymore. Even without that hinderance, I believe the implimentation had numerous bugs, and (from my understanding of discussions with people who know more) several implimentation limitations that severly restricted its usefulness as anything other than a curiosity for research work. Gary -- Gary Palmer FreeBSD Core Team Member FreeBSD: Turning PC's into workstations. See http://www.FreeBSD.ORG/ for info To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Nov 24 04:28:48 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA15182 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 04:28:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sv01.cet.co.jp (sv01.cet.co.jp [210.171.56.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA15177 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 04:28:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Received: from localhost (michaelh@localhost) by sv01.cet.co.jp (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA17715; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 12:28:21 GMT (envelope-from michaelh@cet.co.jp) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 21:28:21 +0900 (JST) From: Michael Hancock To: Artem Tepponen cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: unionfs broken? In-Reply-To: <36599C38.1CFBAE39@onego.ru> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Yes, it's broken. One approach to fixing it is in John Heidemann's object cache manager paper. Regards, Mike Hancock On Mon, 23 Nov 1998, Artem Tepponen wrote: > Hi, all! > > I have some questions regarding unionfs and mount -o union. > Are they broken? Tried to use them both and got kernel panic > messages. Is there anybody who's going to fix this? > If no, then can somebody give hints about where to start from? > > With best regards, Artem > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Nov 24 07:02:18 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA00977 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 07:02:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA00971 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 07:02:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id QAA00760; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 16:02:08 +0100 (CET) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id QAA11871; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 16:02:08 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <19981124160207.C24412@follo.net> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1998 16:02:07 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund To: Artem Tepponen , freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: unionfs broken? References: <199811231730.UAA30134@ns.onego.ru> <36599C38.1CFBAE39@onego.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <36599C38.1CFBAE39@onego.ru>; from Artem Tepponen on Mon, Nov 23, 1998 at 05:32:40PM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, Nov 23, 1998 at 05:32:40PM +0000, Artem Tepponen wrote: > Hi, all! > > I have some questions regarding unionfs and mount -o union. > Are they broken? Tried to use them both and got kernel panic > messages. Is there anybody who's going to fix this? I don't think there is anybody actively working on it. > If no, then can somebody give hints about where to start from? http://www.freebsd.org/~eivind/VOP_GETBACKINGOBJECT.patch might prove useful. The same with the paper Michael referenced, and Heidemann's paper on stacking layers at the basic level. You have to fully understand the interactions in the area - I do not. The patch above is a shot in the dusk at providing the infrastructure I believe will be needed for a working stacking layer architecture. Other parts probably include: VOP_GETBACKINGVP() - Translate a VP to the endpoint VP. Change the locking infrastructure to be veto-based locking. I'm pretty certain this list is incomplete. You may want to talk to Terry Lambert , who probably is the person that has the best overview of how to fix this. HOWEVER: Do NOT try to fix it all at once. This will almost certainly not be integrated (I'm not saying this to disparage you, just to make you aware of the problems you're likely to face). The best way to fix it (including getting it integrated) is probably this: 1. Work in a CVS (NOT CVSup) based environment. 2. Attempt to wrap your mind about at least part of the problem. Try to identify things that have to be fixed. 3. Each time you've fixed one part of the problem, take a copy of the kernel tree you're working on, including the CVS/ directories that contain CVS meta-information. 4. Repeat step 2 and 3 until you have it working. 5. Write up a short description of the steps you've taken, a somewhat detailed description of the first step, and provide patches for the first step as well as patches to make it all work - relative to -current as of the time you submit the patches . Make it clear that you are aware that things will have to be stepwise integrated, Ask for feedback on the procedure used to solve the problem as well as feedback on the first level patches. 6. If your way of solving the problem is at all palatable, you _will_ get your patches integrated. Keep the pressure up until you either do or get your patches turned down fully (which is very unlikely). 7. Update your set of CVS-trees to be from -current with your first-level patches integrated. (This may be a bit of merge-work - unfortunately, I think it is unavoidable.) 8. Repeat step 5 through 7 until all your levels are integrated, and unionFS works. When you do your changes, make sure you don't do random changes (like whitespace-changes); keep it to minimal patches. You will probably want to have your first level of patches reviewed, to make sure any style-problems are caught as early as possible - otherwise, you'll get a _LOT_ of merge-work in step 7. Sorry to have to outline such an elaborate way of handling this; however, it is the only way I believe it will be possible to get the necessary changes in (unless one of the committers does it). Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Tue Nov 24 16:27:02 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id QAA29923 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 16:27:02 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from varmail.net (varmail.net [203.46.50.11] (may be forged)) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA29508; Tue, 24 Nov 1998 16:24:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from offer@varmail.net) Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by varmail.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA08558; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:22:43 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from offer@varmail.net) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:22:43 +1000 (EST) Received: by varmail.net (bulk_mailer v1.11); Wed, 25 Nov 1998 02:07:25 +1000 From: melanie@varmail.net To: members@wetmelanie.com Subject: A Great Selection of FREE Adult Sites! Message-ID: Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org We have put together a list of 4 Great Adult sites for your viewing pleasure, all FREE and exclusive. Just click on http://www.varmail.net/1011/ to browse the great, FREE content on offer. Click Here ------------------------------------------------ You are receiving this message because you, or someone pretending to be you, added your contact address to our list. To remove yourself from this mailing list please reply to this message with "Remove" in the subject field. ------------------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Nov 25 10:47:11 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28181 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:47:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from gatewaya.anheuser-busch.com (gatewaya.anheuser-busch.com [151.145.250.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA28176 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:47:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com) Received: by gatewaya.anheuser-busch.com; id MAA04123; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 12:39:49 -0600 Received: from stlabcexg004.anheuser-busch.com(stlabcexg004 151.145.101.160) by gatewaya via smap (V2.1) id xma004111; Wed, 25 Nov 98 12:39:27 -0600 Received: by stlabcexg004.anheuser-busch.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) id ; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 18:41:53 -0000 Message-ID: <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF9017766BA@STLABCEXG011> From: "Alton, Matthew" To: "'Assar Westerlund'" , "'marius.bendiksen@scancall.no'" Cc: "'FreeBSD-fs@freebsd.org'" Subject: RE: Is LFS operational? Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 18:41:57 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm working on isolating and expanding upon the Oracle 8i ifs functionality. That's it in a nutshell. I've been at it for a year or so (search the -fs mail archives for me as author). My filesystem adheres strictly to the following design tenets: 1) All components will run entirely in user-space with no kernel modification at all. 2) All components will be written in ANSI C for maximum port- ability. 3) All components will be available under the terms of the GPL. Goals: 1) Append-only log structure. 2) File versioning. I've run into a big snag concerning local caching. Userland has no mbufs. Hmmm... > -----Original Message----- > From: Assar Westerlund [SMTP:assar@sics.se] > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 7:46 AM > To: Alton, Matthew > Subject: Re: Is LFS operational? > > "Alton, Matthew" writes: > > The LFS should not be used as it is. I think it's also gone in 2.2.7. > > I'm working on an advanced FS which will superset it nicely. > > Hi. I'm curious. Can you tell me anything more about this advanced > FS you're working on? > > /assar To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Nov 25 10:51:30 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id KAA28622 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:51:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from www.scancall.no (www.scancall.no [195.139.183.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA28617 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 10:51:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Marius.Bendiksen@scancall.no) Received: from super2.langesund.scancall.no [195.139.183.29] by www with smtp id KGPWNDMJ; Wed, 25 Nov 98 18:51:21 GMT (PowerWeb version 4.04r6) Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19981125195105.00999af0@mail.scancall.no> X-Sender: Marius@mail.scancall.no X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 19:51:05 +0100 To: "Alton, Matthew" , "'Assar Westerlund'" From: Marius Bendiksen Subject: RE: Is LFS operational? Cc: "'FreeBSD-fs@freebsd.org'" In-Reply-To: <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF9017766BA@STLABCEXG011> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >1) All components will run entirely in user-space with no kernel > modification at all. Sounds good. >2) All components will be written in ANSI C for maximum port- > ability. Sounds good. >3) All components will be available under the terms of the GPL. Does not sound very good at all. --- Marius Bendiksen, IT-Trainee, ScanCall AS To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Wed Nov 25 18:06:07 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA11870 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 18:06:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [207.153.65.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA11859 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 18:06:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from scanner@jurai.net) From: scanner@jurai.net Received: from localhost (scanner@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id VAA03919; Wed, 25 Nov 1998 21:05:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 21:05:33 -0500 (EST) To: "Alton, Matthew" cc: "'Assar Westerlund'" , "'marius.bendiksen@scancall.no'" , "'FreeBSD-fs@freebsd.org'" Subject: RE: Is LFS operational? In-Reply-To: <31B3F0BF1C40D11192A700805FD48BF9017766BA@STLABCEXG011> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 25 Nov 1998, Alton, Matthew wrote: > 3) All components will be available under the terms of the GPL. PLEASE don't do this. I doubt any of the BSD's will adopt it if you do. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-fs Thu Nov 26 02:03:41 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA14577 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Thu, 26 Nov 1998 02:03:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from send105.yahoomail.com (send105.yahoomail.com [205.180.60.128]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id CAA14570 for ; Thu, 26 Nov 1998 02:03:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from farshidoo@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <19981126100645.20643.rocketmail@send105.yahoomail.com> Received: from [195.200.227.134] by send105.yahoomail.com; Thu, 26 Nov 1998 02:06:44 PST Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 02:06:44 -0800 (PST) From: Farshidoo Subject: RE: Is LFS operational? To: Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com Cc: FreeBSD-fs@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi, > 1) All components will run entirely in user-space with no kernel > modification at all. > 2) All components will be written in ANSI C for maximum port- > ability. > Good ideas. I'm eagerly waiting for seeing your file system. > 3) All components will be available under the terms of the GPL. > Why don't you keep your sources consistent with other parts of FreeBSD from copyright point of view?? Cheers, --Farshid _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message