linux-kernel - Re: Why ask Sun for ZFS while we have ReiserFS4 !?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 29 Apr 2007 21:38:43 +0200 (MEST)
From:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To:	Andrew Wang <andrewxwang@...oo.com.tw>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why ask Sun for ZFS while we have ReiserFS4 !?

On Apr 30 2007 02:18, Andrew Wang wrote:
>
>ZFS has some nice features, but ReiserFS4 also is a
>good file system.
>
>Why do we want Sun to release ZFS under GPL, while
>ReiserFS4 is already available under GPL!?

Do we?

>I know that ReiserFS4 breaks Linux coding standards.
>However, even if Sun releases ZFS under GPL, we still
>need to port it to the Linux kernel.
>
>I think for those who ask/beg Sun to release ZFS under
>GPL should do the work to get ReiserFS4 to Linux!

It's already there for Linux. It's just that you have to
merge it yourself.

RR:
Some people have different opinions about what constitutes
a good filesystem. One half goes with ext, the other with
<CENSORED>, mainly because "it works" for them, has "proven
to be stable enough", "<CENSORED> has not proven to be
stable", or perhaps just out of fs beliefs/conviction.
I myself would not 'want' either zfs or r4 at this time,
and there's even an objective reason behind it.

Jan
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/