From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 9 16:48:02 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E5B016A4F5 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 16:48:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CB0343DA2 for ; Mon, 9 May 2005 16:48:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from [192.168.254.21] (rat.samsco.home [192.168.254.21]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j49Gqp33029240; Mon, 9 May 2005 10:52:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Message-ID: <427F9404.8060509@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 10:47:00 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050321 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: =?UTF-8?B?SmVhbi1Tw6liYXN0aWVuIFDDqWRyb24=?= References: <427F491C.4090501@club-internet.fr> In-Reply-To: <427F491C.4090501@club-internet.fr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on pooker.samsco.org cc: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for feedback about ReiserFS import X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 16:48:02 -0000 Jean-Sébastien Pédron wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The current port of ReiserFS is ready to be imported in the tree for a > few months, however my mentor mux@ and I have concerns about the > organization of the sources of this version. > > Originally, the port is based on Linux 2.6.7. My goal was to distribute > it as a 3rd party package, maybe a port. Because I was interested in > kernel development and how ReiserFS was working, I started from scratch, > bringing the necessary pieces of code from Linux little by little, to > achieve read-only support. > > The main issue with this approach is maintainability: the filenames and > source layout is different between the original Linux version and the > port. Changes in the Linux tree are harder to track. > > I'd like to import this version in FreeBSD's tree, because: > - ReiserFS' homepage (http://www.namesys.com/) says it shouldn't evolve > anymore (just rare bugfixes). For instance, between Linux 2.6.7 and > 2.6.11.3, they added a few checks of functions' return code. > - with my approach, I have a better knowledge of the filesystem > internals. If we want a BSD licensed version, it should be easier. > - work is more interesting this way than just make the Linux version > compile. > - it's already done ;) > > But I know that the tradition is to import external code with changes as > less intrusive as possible, for good reason. Does anyone has objections > for this? > > -- I'll agree with Greg that it's not optimal. Life changes, and in a few years you might move on and no longer be interested in ReiserFS. That will make it very hard to stay in sync over the long term. However, if this is to be the basis for doing a GPL-free version of ReiserFS, then there is nothing wrong with changing the layout. I guess it all comes down to what your long-term plans and committments are. If what you have now is what you are comfortable with and you have plans to continue to maintain and improve it, then by all means import it. Scott