| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0704292052050.22744@yvahk01.tjqt.qr> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists