Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 17:18:52 -0500 (EST) From: Erez Zadok <ezk@cs.columbia.edu> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: ezk@cs.columbia.edu (Erez Zadok), freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: nullfs bugs Message-ID: <199812182218.RAA12135@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 18 Dec 1998 21:41:55 GMT." <199812182141.OAA11441@usr09.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks, there's a lot of info in your message that I have to digest. I'll probably have to re-read it several times while keeping freebsd sources close at hand. When I'm done you'd probably be back from vacation... :-) I'll try to comment on the rest of the message later. I agree that we should have a mini-design pass before seriously implementing anything of the sort. But I may still take a stab at it, at least to see how complicated the work is and outline potential trouble spots. In all of the ports I've done, I tried very hard to avoid changing the rest of the OS, esp. in a way that would require making changes to other file systems. I was able to have a wrapper file system (and a crypto f/s) on freebsd and solaris w/o changing them, and on linux only had one small change that didn't affect anything else. Being new here, let me ask this beginner question. How receptive are the freebsd developers to accepting such fixes, given that the changes won't be trivial. In particular, is there a chance they'd be incorporated into 3.0 for a near-future release? I'm asking this b/c I don't wish to have to maintain a different set of kernel sources for too long. Erez. 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?199812182218.RAA12135>