Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 12:21:58 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: scanner@jurai.net Cc: Brad Knowles <brad.knowles@skynet.be>, Hiten Pandya <hitmaster2k@yahoo.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD) Message-ID: <20011215122158.A87600@monorchid.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0112142003280.90198-100000@sasami.jurai.net> References: <20011215112539.L85108@monorchid.lemis.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0112142003280.90198-100000@sasami.jurai.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday, 14 December 2001 at 20:26:35 -0500, scanner@jurai.net wrote: > On Sat, 15 Dec 2001, Greg Lehey wrote: > > [...snip...] > >>> IMO, we'd be better off asking SGI (and their former employees) >>> about XFS. Or just come up with our own journaling filesystem that >>> is totally independant of the IBM code (satisfies the same design >>> goals at the highest level, but below that point shares no >>> specifications or implementation details). >> >> "Reinvent the wheel". > > Sure. Why not? Linux has been doing it since day one. The entire Linux OS > is a "revinention of the wheel". To hell with building on the foundation > of others. > >>> Indeed, I think we could safely argue that softupdates is a >>> long ways towards this goal as it is, and that in many ways it is >>> superior. Combine that with dirprefs and dirhash, and I see very >>> little reason to want JFS. >> >> Indeed. One of the reasons I'd like to see a JFS port is to be able >> to compare it with the current UFS. I really wouldn't like to bet on >> which one came out on top. But so far, we only have theoretical >> papers to base our opinions on. > > Yes doing so would be nice. For that exact reason. To see some real > numbers and how they stack up. However i'm with brad it would be better > considering the nature of the GPL on JFS, to get co-operation from > SGI. Maybe they would consider another point of view in licensing their > XFS to the BSD folks. Then again maybe not. I'd bet on them not doing it. > And again I think the only solution that is even going to remotely > fly is to talk to vendors about getting source under a BSD like > license. I think with the right people at SGI some sane discussions > could take place. Feel free to go ahead. But I really don't think that you'll have much success. Don't get me wrong, I think that XFS has a lot of advantages too. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011215122158.A87600>