From owner-freebsd-current  Wed Jun 11 12:59:46 1997
Return-Path: <owner-current>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id MAA14087
          for current-outgoing; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:59:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dyson.iquest.net (dyson.iquest.net [198.70.144.127])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id MAA14066
          for <current@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:59:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from root@localhost)
	by dyson.iquest.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA09630;
	Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:57:49 -0500 (EST)
From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net>
Message-Id: <199706111957.OAA09630@dyson.iquest.net>
Subject: Re: vxfs (was Re: overclocking)
In-Reply-To: <199706111847.LAA06429@phaeton.artisoft.com> from Terry Lambert at "Jun 11, 97 11:47:57 am"
To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert)
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 14:57:49 -0500 (EST)
Cc: michaelh@cet.co.jp, hasty@rah.star-gate.com, current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL31 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-current@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> [ ... VXFS ... ]
> 
> > It's not available for *BSD.  The reasons cited were ...
> > 
> > 1) It's a large porting task, fs/vnode semantics vary quite a bit
> >    between Unix implementations.
> 
> Actually, it would not be a difficult port (I worked on the VXFS
> code in UnixWare a bit; I'm fairly familiar with it).  The most
> difficult task would be the Vm/Cache issues, mostly because the
> new VM system is poorly documented (good code; bad docs).
> 
I disagree (here is my correction):

 new VM system is poorly documented (good code; NO docs).

:-(.

John