Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:35:18 +0800 From: "=?gb2312?B?WGluIExJL8Du9s4=?=" <delphij@frontfree.net> To: "'Shen Lily'" <gb_orchid@hotmail.com>, <doc@FreeBSD.org> Subject: RE: Why does freebsd not support it? Message-ID: <20031103113353.465B95299@www.delphij.net> In-Reply-To: <BAY10-F25Un0RvnOLa60004b3ce@hotmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I think the reason why there is not LFS support is, the LFS code dies out in the tree for a long while and porting from other BSDs is not trivial. In addition, pratically, Soft Updates will be better in many aspects, I guess this is the primary reason why there is not a LFS support available. I think it will be valuable to have a read-only LFS support in FreeBSD. However, I don't think it's a heavily desireable feature, because Soft Updates does well in most cases. -----Original Message----- From: owner-freebsd-doc@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-doc@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Shen Lily Sent: Monday, November 03, 2003 4:34 PM To: doc@FreeBSD.org Subject: Why does freebsd not support it? > I read some papers that say LFS has superiority over FFS in some aspect. > Why does freebsd not support it?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031103113353.465B95299>