Date: Tue, 03 Sep 1996 14:23:18 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Jake Hamby <jehamby@lightside.com> Cc: "Hr.Ladavac" <lada@ws2301.gud.siemens.co.at>, Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux 96 (my impressions) Message-ID: <199609032023.OAA27886@rover.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 03 Sep 1996 11:15:22 PDT
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
: Disadvantage: I couldn't mount either FreeBSD or Solaris-formatted UFS : filesystems, even though there is a (read-only) UFS filesystem support. I : just got a bunch of messages (including "f**king Sun blows me" whatever : that's supposed to mean!!) and an empty mount point. The Solaris port of Linux does a much better job. The patches to grok UFS file systems were considered too big to be included in 2.0. This is second hand information, but I believe it to be reliable. : Advantage: Linux supports the Amiga filesystem. Pretty cool since I : happened to have an Amiga-formatted Zip disk lying around! The NetBSD and OpenBSD have something called adosfs. I don't know if it is endian clean or not. I don't know the effort of porting to FreeBSD, but that might not be a bad place to start if someone was wanting this bad enough... : read it (or maybe not, I forget whether ext2fs is byte-swapped on 680x0 or : not!). It is supposed to understand FreeBSD and Solaris slice info as The 68k port of Linux uses the file system in native byte order, rather than intel byte order. There has been some talk of making ext2fs endian clean, but I've not seen the results of this effort yet. Warner
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199609032023.OAA27886>