Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 22:10:50 -0600 (MDT) From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com> To: aryeh.friedman@gmail.com Cc: ryba@sylow.cs.qc.cuny.edu, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, csjp@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/fs/ntfs ntfs_subr.c Message-ID: <20080329.221050.1649770238.imp@bsdimp.com> In-Reply-To: <47EEF9CA.9080008@gmail.com> References: <200803300219.m2U2JSjv016162@repoman.freebsd.org> <47EEF9CA.9080008@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message: <47EEF9CA.9080008@gmail.com>
"Aryeh M. Friedman" <aryeh.friedman@gmail.com> writes:
: Christian S.J. Peron wrote:
: > csjp 2008-03-30 02:19:27 UTC
: >
: > FreeBSD src repository
: >
: > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_7)
: > sys/fs/ntfs ntfs_subr.c
: > Log:
: > Un-break the build by adding a thread argument. This was removed in
: > -CURRENT but this change has not been MFCed yet.
: >
: > Submitted by: attilo
: >
: > Revision Changes Path
: > 1.42.2.2 +1 -1 src/sys/fs/ntfs/ntfs_subr.c
:
:
: I know this question should be else where but since the kernel ntfs
: doesn't allow for writting and fusefs-ntfs is stable why is ntfs still
: in the kernel and if it should be there why not replace it with fuse?
Because the kernel based ntfs works and is BSD. FUSE is GPL, and new
GPL components are to be avoided.
ntfs, btw, handles write errors better than any other file system in
the system today. I've been able to recover 90% of the files from a
badly damaged disk where other recovery utilities got only 10%.
Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080329.221050.1649770238.imp>