Date: Sat, 18 Jul 1998 09:35:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock) Cc: Matthew.Alton@anheuser-busch.com, FreeBSD-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: LFS & soft updates Message-ID: <199807180935.CAA03733@usr07.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.95.980718152940.13506A-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from "Michael Hancock" at Jul 18, 98 03:36:11 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199807180935.CAA03733>