Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 31 Jul 2001 16:11:19 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, m p <sumirati@yahoo.de>, jasonf@citynet.net, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Porting a new filesystem to FreeBSD
Message-ID:  <20010731161119.L80898@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <3B665253.1D8A22D5@mindspring.com>; from tlambert2@mindspring.com on Mon, Jul 30, 2001 at 11:38:11PM -0700
References:  <20010717082210.76404.qmail@web13303.mail.yahoo.com> <200107310222.TAA28694@usr01.primenet.com> <20010731115727.B80898@wantadilla.lemis.com> <3B665253.1D8A22D5@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, 30 July 2001 at 23:38:11 -0700, Terry Lambert wrote:
> Greg Lehey wrote:
>> The OS/2 JFS was the basis for the "new" JFS 2 under AIX.  There would
>> have been little point in releasing the sources for the "old" JFS,
>> which is being phased out.
>
> Which is a side issue to the fact that it's GPL'ed, and so
> it is not possible to legally distribute a CDROM with a
> kernel with the code linked into it.

The GPL is also a side issue to what I was talking about.  But of
course it's legally possible to distribute a CD-ROM with a kernel.  We
just need to change the license.  The issue here is not of legality,
but that we're not prepared to change the license.

> Having seen both the AIX GFS implementation of JFS, and the OS/2
> JFS, I have to say that the AIX version is much better code, IMO.
> The "JFS 2" thing is inferior, IMO.

This makes no sense.  My AIX box runs JFS2.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address and phone numbers

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010731161119.L80898>