From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 7 23:12:05 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D6416A41B for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 23:12:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC42613C458 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 23:12:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-arch@m.gmane.org) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JNFJV-0005Em-Rp for freebsd-arch@freebsd.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:33:49 +0000 Received: from r5j156.net.upc.cz ([86.49.9.156]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:33:49 +0000 Received: from gamato by r5j156.net.upc.cz with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:33:49 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org From: martinko Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:33:42 +0100 Lines: 39 Message-ID: References: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com> <1202395350.2126.14.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: r5j156.net.upc.cz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.11) Gecko/20080203 SeaMonkey/1.1.7 In-Reply-To: <1202395350.2126.14.camel@localhost> Sender: news Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove NTFS kernel support X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:12:05 -0000 Tom Evans wrote: > On Thu, 2008-02-07 at 02:00 +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: >> As exposed by several users, NTFS seems to be broken even before first >> VFS commits happeing around the end of December. Those commits exposed >> some problems about NTFS which are currently under investigation. >> Ultimately, This filesystem is also unmaintained at the moment. >> >> Speaking with jeff, we agreed on what can be a possible compromise: >> remove the kernel support for NTFS and maybe take care of the FUSE >> implementation. >> What I now propose is a small survey which can shade a light on us >> about what do you think about this idea and its implications: >> - Do you use NTFS? > Yes >> - Are you interested in maintaining it? > No, wouldn't know how >> - Do you know a good reason to not use FUSE ntfs implementation? What >> the kernel counter part adds? > Didn't work last time I tried, running RELENG_7 and the NTFS support in > base does everything I need, don't experience any problems. I don't like > the idea of >> - Do you think axing the kernel support a good idea? >> > Truthfully, no not really. If no-one wishes to maintain it/fix it now, > then I'd prefer it to be disconnected from the build until it annoys > someone enough. Apparently its already broken and unusable, but WFM. > /dev/ad4s1 on /mnt/windows (ntfs, local, read-only) > > If the base NTFS support was axed, would the fuse-kmod, or equivalent, > find its way into the base? > >> Thanks, >> Attilio >> > > Tom And what about puffs from NetBSD ? Wouldn't it be better to import puffs and ReFUSE ?