From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jan 20 09:42:54 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F052106566C for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:42:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: from smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg (smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg [192.169.41.31]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 343808FC0A for ; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:42:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 24408 invoked from network); 20 Jan 2009 09:42:50 -0000 Received: from bb116-14-19-136.singnet.com.sg (HELO ?10.0.1.131?) (oceanare@116.14.19.136) by smtpgate1.pacific.net.sg with ESMTPA; 20 Jan 2009 09:42:50 -0000 From: Erich Dollansky To: Maxim Sobolev In-Reply-To: <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org> References: <49742ADA.5080509@FreeBSD.org> <1232350919.2322.3.camel@P2120.somewherefaraway.com> <49743B52.5040108@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 17:42:53 +0800 Message-Id: <1232444573.2191.20.camel@P2120.somewherefaraway.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "current@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: NTFS in GENERIC: opt-in or opt-out? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:42:54 -0000 Hi, On Mon, 2009-01-19 at 00:35 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Erich Dollansky wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, 2009-01-18 at 23:25 -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I am reviewing differences between amd64 and i386 GENERIC kernels and > >> noticed that for some unclear reason we ship amd64 GENERIC with NTFS > >> module compiled in, while i386 without it. IMHO both should match. The > >> question is whether NTFS should be i386 way (opt in) or amd64 way (opt > > > > the Windows file system? > > > > I would use opt-in as most people will not need it. > > Any particular reason why not? Memory is cheap, 100-200KB of extra > kernel code doesn't really matter today, while NTFS is probably the most it still matters. Not one driver this size alone, but if all drivers together are always in the system, it is at the end nothing else than a direct replacement for Windows: slow and full of stuff the user does not need. > widespread filesystem after MSDOS. Therefore supporting it in the > GENERIC out of the box even in the read-only mode (our NTFS driver is > read-only AFAIK) could benefit many users. Thumb Drives are mostly formatted with FAT-32. So NTFS in the kernel will not make a difference. Erich