Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 03:08:06 -0600 From: Scot Hetzel <swhetzel@gmail.com> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@freebsd.org> Cc: Erich Dollansky <oceanare@pacific.net.sg>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: NTFS in GENERIC: opt-in or opt-out? Message-ID: <790a9fff0901190108r4eb3232bqfc6a0c8af8cd7c71@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org> References: <49742ADA.5080509@FreeBSD.org> <1232350919.2322.3.camel@P2120.somewherefaraway.com> <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:35 AM, 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 have been using FreeBSD/amd64, and my kernel doesn't include the NTFS filesystem complied in. Instead, I let the mount command load the ntfs.ko kernel module when I need read access to my NTFS filesystems. Since a buildkernel will install the ntfs.ko kernel module by default, their is no need to have the NTFS filesystem complied into GENERIC. Scothome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?790a9fff0901190108r4eb3232bqfc6a0c8af8cd7c71>