On Sonntag, 17. Februar 2008, Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Sunday 17 February 2008, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote: > > On Sonntag, 17. Februar 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2008 at 03:41:36AM +0000, James wrote: > > > > That's the whole rub (in essence) as to why reiser4fs will never > > > > make it into the kernel. Lots of kernel folks *do not trust Hans > > > > Reiser*....... > > > > > > > > His abusive shenanigans are an issue, but, not really why > > > > reiser4fs is doomed. > > > > > > As I understand it, the main arguments against reiser4 are that it > > > duplicates a ton of code in the VFS (Virtual File System) > > > > it did not duplicate code, but contained code some devs believed to > > belong into the vfs layer. > > > > Funnily some month ago ext4 devs tried the same - and had to be > > stopped by Andrew Morton. > > You seem to be equating two things that are actually vastly different > outside the realm of just the code. > > There's a difference between on the one hand trying a dodgy tactic out > of ignorance but still being willing to listen to reason, and on the > other hand being a total complete prick who is always convinced of > their own rightness and the rest of the world is always completely > wrong. >
and there is a certain asshole-ness to first attack an fs for its 'features' and then do the exact same with your pet-fs. -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
