From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263117AbVFXPwy (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:52:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263058AbVFXPsd (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:48:33 -0400 Received: from inti.inf.utfsm.cl ([200.1.21.155]:13773 "EHLO inti.inf.utfsm.cl") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263036AbVFXPrR (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:47:17 -0400 Message-Id: <200506241545.j5OFj3Iw014214@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> To: tdwebste2@yahoo.com cc: Lincoln Dale , Hans Reiser , Alan Cox , David Masover , Horst von Brand , Jeff Garzik , Christoph Hellwig , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ReiserFS List Subject: Re: reiser4 plugins In-Reply-To: Message from Timothy Webster of "Fri, 24 Jun 2005 02:35:10 MST." <20050624093510.4330.qmail@web51301.mail.yahoo.com> X-Mailer: MH-E 7.4.2; nmh 1.1; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 17) Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:45:03 -0400 From: Horst von Brand X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0b5 (inti.inf.utfsm.cl [200.1.21.155]); Fri, 24 Jun 2005 11:45:04 -0400 (CLT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Timothy Webster wrote: [...] > I think it is the task of the linux community to > generalize the vfs layer and not lock out reiserfs4 > until that is done. No... the task of the Linux community is to make a better kernel. You will have to do the work to convince it that the changes give a better kernel if included. That means the work to find out what they object to, solve the problem (if it can be solved), and try again. > reiserfs4 wants to keep a plugin > id for each and every file. Good for you. Nobody else has shown any interest in that. > An additional filesystem > layer is the traditional solution to achieve advanced > features, but not an optimal solution in my opinion. Right. And what is said here is to /use/ said layer (VFS) or see how it can be changed to cater for your needs. > Yes gnome, kde and perhaps cifs do it. Gnome and KDE are userspace utilities, designed to run on several operating systems that do not have such filesystem plugins at all, plus for the foreseable future the mayority of Linux (file)systems won't have them either; so they probably won't ever use it for portability's sake. CIFS is a second class citizen AFAIU, as it exists for compatibility with legacy systems only. So none of the above is in any way compelling. > But if instead > they used file plugins a lot more could be shared. > Blush, I am not a file system expert /me neither ;-) -- Dr. Horst H. von Brand User #22616 counter.li.org Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513