From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 19 09:35:52 2009 Return-Path: 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 A6650106564A for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com (yw-out-2324.google.com [74.125.46.30]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D3BD8FC18 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:35:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from swhetzel@gmail.com) Received: by yw-out-2324.google.com with SMTP id 9so1071378ywe.13 for ; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 01:35:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BskkgjcIVSAkgbrDHx7C2+0zLibhsu04z/JsjLwX7D0=; b=pNqUk+gy5DUGoN6A4TqfejgoghA8jqr+NumDYhrwNJB+Iky3RZ8hc9zDt6h9WIX2aU JStf+E4AUlDnnHWONaInZIQE72oforSRPdQ8qS/oYObX7SAx1j16L0v4DQGfPt6ffuqT fVrgy+0utX2Pw52lnEqiPZR6VubuvwpwVnvE8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=v1FYx0meGDjGVhdJom/UvhwK+zZzcVvPNf9wmuMdMT62YRx4ButNZ5kkxSN6MgQ9Tm nIOA1vbjhbEN+Qi4AahzWNrRs17qujqkqXO//kvV96sw7M0F17Vf9ffG8GZwMxdcLKqC do36gwGb3Lt04TjPi5aztb6qmpmlwakpFR1SY= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.90.70.6 with SMTP id s6mr2311234aga.33.1232356086277; Mon, 19 Jan 2009 01:08:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org> References: <49742ADA.5080509@FreeBSD.org> <1232350919.2322.3.camel@P2120.somewherefaraway.com> <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org> Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 03:08:06 -0600 Message-ID: <790a9fff0901190108r4eb3232bqfc6a0c8af8cd7c71@mail.gmail.com> From: Scot Hetzel To: Maxim Sobolev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Erich Dollansky , "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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:35:53 -0000 On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Maxim Sobolev 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. Scot