Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:09:12 -0800 From: David Schultz <dschultz@uclink.Berkeley.EDU> To: Cliff Sarginson <cls@raggedclown.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confirmation: ext2fs requires kernel rebuild? Message-ID: <20021121230912.GE6062@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <20021121072556.GB1590@raggedclown.net> References: <p05200f1ab9ff72b26ae1@[66.92.104.201]> <20021119100625.GC679@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <p05200f24ba0073e6b323@[66.92.104.201]> <20021121035034.GA2591@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <p05200f09ba020d2729e6@[66.92.104.201]> <20021121072556.GB1590@raggedclown.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thus spake Cliff Sarginson <cls@raggedclown.net>: > > LINT says: > > ># > > ># Add support for the EXT2FS filesystem of Linux fame. Be a bit > > ># careful with this - the ext2fs code has a tendency to lag behind > > ># changes and not be exercised very much, so mounting read/write could > > ># be dangerous (and even mounting read only could result in panics.) > > ># > > >options EXT2FS > > > This message has been in LINT since the dawn of time and is extremely > mystifying. "Be a bit careful" .. meaning what ? You either mount it or > don't mount it, use it or don't use it. What exactly are you supposed to > be careful of :) Saying "Boo!". FreeBSD support for ext2fs is a specific instance of the more general problem that features that very few people care about tend not to get maintained. FreeBSD already has a filesystem that is more complete and faster than ext2fs,[1] so the only people using both UFS and ext2fs are also running Linux. If you mount an ext2fs filesystem r/w, consider yourself a beta tester. [1] The designers of ext2 basically took FFS and removed the parts they didn't care for or were hard to implement. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20021121230912.GE6062>