Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 16:52:34 +0100 (MET) From: Mats Lofkvist <mal@algonet.se> To: ezk@cs.columbia.edu Cc: freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: stupidfs - easily extensible test file systems? Message-ID: <199911011552.QAA19191@kairos.algonet.se> In-Reply-To: <199910312211.RAA00014@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu> (message from Erez Zadok on Sun, 31 Oct 1999 17:11:20 -0500 (EST)) References: <199910312211.RAA00014@shekel.mcl.cs.columbia.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> And does anyone know if this has a chance being a standard part
> of FreeBSD, and how it relates to the general cleanup of the
> stacking fs code that seem to be on the "todo sometime in the
> future" list for FreeBSD?
What do you mean by "this"? My code will be fixed soon. The problem is
that I'm forced to use synchronous writes to work around the VFS problems.
I don't expect the VFS to be fixed any time soon. It's been broken for a
long time and there aren't too many "customers" complaining about it, or it
would have been fixed by now. It just doesn't appear to be a high priority
for the freebsd developers. I think it's too late for 3.x, but now would be
a good time for freebsd to put those fixes into 4.0, before it becomes the
default stable version.
(My limited VFS knowledge shows here, but what the heck..)
What I wondered was if fist/wrapfs helps cleaning up the FreeBSD VFS code,
is only using it as is, or if it is incompatible with what the FreeBSD
architects have in mind.
I.e. is it a good idea to build a new FreeBSD filesystem using wrapfs?
_
Mats Lofkvist
mal@algonet.se
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?199911011552.QAA19191>