From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 8 11:42:02 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8EFD16A417; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru) Received: from 0.mx.codelabs.ru (0.mx.codelabs.ru [144.206.177.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8377A13C461; Fri, 8 Feb 2008 11:42:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=one; d=codelabs.ru; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:Sender:X-Spam-Status:Subject; b=ciJjB86naW0YoOgEaRDpV3h0H6Xxoh8/UgffukYx9/oBIU7xExXXOpUvLoBcoubCtD6pO2lKbRMawsnroORCsBZ0aTgHnk1b7b5KXeL6I/+XdOxTa7brvU8M2IIcpgu9TjKfxahmVdFt1nGQgHAv3cLNB/n51sqJQTDEO3gLZ2A=; Received: from void.codelabs.ru (void.codelabs.ru [144.206.177.25]) by 0.mx.codelabs.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) id 1JNRQX-000HBR-Ni; Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:29:53 +0300 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 14:29:51 +0300 From: Eygene Ryabinkin To: Attilio Rao Message-ID: References: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com> Sender: rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_40 Cc: Yar Tikhiy , Doug Barton , Jeff Roberson , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Scot Hetzel , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove NTFS kernel support X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 11:42:03 -0000 Attilio, good day. Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 02:00:41AM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: > As exposed by several users, NTFS seems to be broken even before first > VFS commits happeing around the end of December. Those commits exposed > some problems about NTFS which are currently under investigation. > Ultimately, This filesystem is also unmaintained at the moment. > > Speaking with jeff, we agreed on what can be a possible compromise: > remove the kernel support for NTFS and maybe take care of the FUSE > implementation. > What I now propose is a small survey which can shade a light on us > about what do you think about this idea and its implications: > - Do you use NTFS? Yes, especially on the multi-homed notebook systems. In read-only mode it rocks. > - Are you interested in maintaining it? Yes. If you can throw the buglist for NTFS on me, I will be very grateful. > - Do you know a good reason to not use FUSE ntfs implementation? What > the kernel counter part adds? Don't know, newer tried FUSE. > - Do you think axing the kernel support a good idea? IMO, not a good one. -- Eygene