On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 09:22:13AM -0500, Steve Best wrote:
> June 28, 2001:
>
> IBM is pleased to announce the v 1.0.0 release of the open source
> Journaled File System (JFS), a high-performance, and scalable file
> system for Linux.
Great!
I remember that awhile ago there were some case issu
Hi,
first of all congratulations for finishing the initial first release.
Some questions, just out of curiosity:
>* Fast recovery after a system crash or power outage
>
>* Journaling for file system integrity
>
>* Journaling of meta-data only
>
does this mean JSF/Linux always journals onl
Steve Lord wrote:
>>Hi,
>>
>
>>So I only hope that the smart guys at SGI find a way to prepare the
>>patches the way Linus loves because now the file
>>"patch-2.4.5-xfs-1.0.1-core" (which contains the modifs to the kernel
>>and not the new files) is about 174090 bytes which is a lot.
>>
>>YA
On Thu, 28 Jun 2001, james rich wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Yaacov Akiba Slama wrote:
> >
> > > So it seems that even if JFS is less complete than XFS (no ACL, quotas
> > > for instance), and even if it is less robust (I don't know if it is, I
>
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Yaacov Akiba Slama wrote:
>
> > So it seems that even if JFS is less complete than XFS (no ACL, quotas
> > for instance), and even if it is less robust (I don't know if it is, I
> It is not less complete nor less robust, it's a diff
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001, Yaacov Akiba Slama wrote:
> Hi,
> From what I understand from Linus's mail to lkml, there is a difference
> between JFS and XFS:
> JFS doesn't require any modifications to existing code, its only an
> addition.
> XFS on the contrary is far more intrusive.
> So it seems tha
> Hi,
> So I only hope that the smart guys at SGI find a way to prepare the
> patches the way Linus loves because now the file
> "patch-2.4.5-xfs-1.0.1-core" (which contains the modifs to the kernel
> and not the new files) is about 174090 bytes which is a lot.
>
> YA
>
But that is not a pa
> JFS doesn't require any modifications to existing code, its only an
> addition.
It depends how clean the interface is. It is possible to avoid changing
core code by writing your own clone of it - that isnt good and doesnt make
people happy sometimes.
> XFS on the contrary is far more intrusiv
Hi,
From what I understand from Linus's mail to lkml, there is a difference
between JFS and XFS:
JFS doesn't require any modifications to existing code, its only an
addition.
XFS on the contrary is far more intrusive.
So it seems that even if JFS is less complete than XFS (no ACL, quotas
for i
Hello,
Question.
Are there plans to include JFS and XFS in the kernel?
Both those projects have been declared stable by their development
teams, and I'm guessing they can now be included as experimental, just
as reiser has been.
Just curious,
-Kervin
Steve Best wrote:
>
> June 28, 2001:
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
