From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jan 19 08:55:07 2009
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66041106566B;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:55:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mh@kernel32.de)
Received: from crivens.kernel32.de (crivens.asm68k.org [81.169.171.191])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 275E68FC0C;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:55:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mh@kernel32.de)
Received: from www.terrorteam.de (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by crivens.kernel32.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DFF5B02E8;
	Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:39:24 +0100 (CET)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:39:23 +0100
From: Marian Hettwer <mh@kernel32.de>
To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org>
References: <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org>
Message-ID: <87233becc6141aa652478f1b3cef36f1@localhost>
X-Sender: mh@kernel32.de
User-Agent: RoundCube Webmail/0.1-rc2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg>, current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: NTFS in GENERIC: opt-in or opt-out?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 08:55:07 -0000



On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 00:35:30 -0800, Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org>
wrote:
> Erich Dollansky wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 23:25 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am reviewing differences between amd64 and i386 GENERIC kernels and
>>> noticed that for some unclear reason we ship amd64 GENERIC with NTFS
>>> module compiled in, while i386 without it. IMHO both should match. The
>>> question is whether NTFS should be i386 way (opt in) or amd64 way (opt
>>
>> the Windows file system?
>>
>> I would use opt-in as most people will not need it.
> 
> Any particular reason why not? Memory is cheap, 100-200KB of extra
> kernel code doesn't really matter today, while NTFS is probably the most
> widespread filesystem after MSDOS. Therefore supporting it in the
> GENERIC out of the box even in the read-only mode (our NTFS driver is
> read-only AFAIK) could benefit many users.
>
I'd like to have it loaded as a modile on demand, as soon as I try to
mount_ntfs.
I would throw it out of GENERIC if its up to me.
Although I don't have technical arguments for throwing it out of GENERIC ;)

Cheers,
./Marian