On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <bjkf...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 5:44 AM, Robert N. M. Watson <rwat...@freebsd.org> > wrote: >> >> When we talked to various VFS maintainers, looked at the past change >> history there, and looked at the set of third-party file systems >> (especially, those we could see in ports), the consensus there was that it >> was too difficult to define a stable VFS KPI and KBI for third-party >> modules. In particular, there appear to be at most one or two in ports at >> any given moment, and quick analyses of them suggested that their kernel >> feature dependency footprint was far more than just "vnode operations". > > > If OpenAFS is the only out-of-tree filesystem in ports, then most definitely > there are far more dependencies in place. I don't know how closely Isilon's > stuff keeps to our models
KBI/ABI are not relevant for Isilon since we build universe every time. Changes to the KPI need to be tracked, of course. I don't know if there are other vendors with a custom filesystem who are not shipping a whole system (NetApp has a pretty odd use case AFAIK). Cheers, matthew _______________________________________________ svn-src-stable-9@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-stable-9 To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-stable-9-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
