From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 7 23:39:05 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 8CFAB16A418; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 23:39:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (trang.nuxi.org [74.95.12.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63DF913C4CC; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 23:39:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from obrien@NUXI.org) Received: from dragon.nuxi.org (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m17NQ57g003728; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:26:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.org) Received: (from obrien@localhost) by dragon.nuxi.org (8.14.1/8.14.1/Submit) id m17NQ50x003727; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:26:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from obrien) Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 15:26:05 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" To: Alfred Perlstein Message-ID: <20080207232605.GA3673@dragon.NUXI.org> Mail-Followup-To: obrien@freebsd.org, Alfred Perlstein , Attilio Rao , Yar Tikhiy , Doug Barton , Jeff Roberson , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Scot Hetzel , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org References: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com> <20080207071314.GO99258@elvis.mu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080207071314.GO99258@elvis.mu.org> X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 8.0-CURRENT User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) Cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Yar Tikhiy , Doug Barton , Jeff Roberson , Attilio Rao , Scot Hetzel , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove NTFS kernel support X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: obrien@freebsd.org 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 23:39:05 -0000 On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 11:13:14PM -0800, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > * Attilio Rao [080206 17:00] wrote: > > remove the kernel support for NTFS and maybe take care of the FUSE > > implementation. .. > > My pragmatic view on this is that I think it's odd that something > that is sort-of working for a few people is going to be axed by > people that don't use it, while promising to replace it with something > better. > > Maybe a nicer way of saying/asking would be to ask: > > Is the FUSE replacement going to be tested to the point where it's > better than then current NTFS code? Hear, Hear!