From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Jun 21 18:52:58 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA17587 for questions-outgoing; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:52:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from jraynard.demon.co.uk (jraynard.demon.co.uk [158.152.42.77]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA17581 for ; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 18:52:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from fqueries@localhost) by jraynard.demon.co.uk (8.7.5/8.6.12) id XAA10442; Fri, 21 Jun 1996 23:10:28 GMT Date: Fri, 21 Jun 1996 23:10:28 GMT Message-Id: <199606212310.XAA10442@jraynard.demon.co.uk> From: James Raynard To: anneb@svl.tec.army.mil CC: kline@tera.com, black@MR.Net, questions@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <199606211936.PAA11013@svl.tec.army.mil> (message from Anne Brink on Fri, 21 Jun 1996 15:36:05 -0400) Subject: Re: LFS anyone? Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >>>>> Anne Brink writes: > > LFS isn't currently working on FreeBSD, since the vm/buffer cache merge. > I looked into playing with the source code, but decided I haven't done enough > kernel hacking yet to be able to handle doing a decent job. The FS code is > NOT easy going. I read Dr. Margo Seltzer's papers on implementing LFS in BSD, > and what she discussed as needed and decided it was out of my league at this > point. It would be way cool to have, though, and should work much more cleanly > in FreeBSD than in straight 4.4, if I understand her main points correctly. > > I'm told None of the funky 4.4 file systems work, since they need to be patched > to handle it. Others more knowledgable than I may care to comment. As for LFS, I'm told that Portals is in fairly good shape (don't know about any of the others). As for LFS, it was discussed on the -hackers list a few weeks ago and "Hr.Ladavac" volunteered to do some preliminary work on it. -- James Raynard, Edinburgh, Scotland james@jraynard.demon.co.uk