From owner-freebsd-fs Sat Jul 18 02:36:34 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA05412 for freebsd-fs-outgoing; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:36:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp02.primenet.com (daemon@smtp02.primenet.com [206.165.6.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id CAA05407 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:36:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert@usr07.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp02.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id CAA08550; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:36:11 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr07.primenet.com(206.165.6.207) via SMTP by smtp02.primenet.com, id smtpd008544; Sat Jul 18 02:36:07 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr07.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id CAA03733; Sat, 18 Jul 1998 02:35:59 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199807180935.CAA03733@usr07.primenet.com> Subject: Re: LFS & soft updates To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 09:35:59 +0000 (GMT) Cc: Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com, FreeBSD-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Michael Hancock" at Jul 18, 98 03:36:11 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > What is the status of the McKusick soft-update work? > > Specifically, I need to know if it is usable under 2.2.6 and > > if I have access to the code. > > It's only for current. If you don't have current then have a > look at http://www.freebsd.org/~julian. See my recent postings. The soft updates code is intrinsically tied to the buffer cache implementation because of what constitutes a dependency. Because 2.2.6 and -current have different implementations, the code will not port over easily. The implementations are similar, of course, but the code depends on a brute-force soloution to a graph problem. To do the port, you would effectively have to do what I suggested was necessary for an LFS port. One interesting thing to note is that there may, in fact, be more dependencies being queued than is strictly necessary; doing the documentation of the events/actors might be a good thing for the -current code, as well, since it might lead to simplifications of the existing code. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-fs" in the body of the message