From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:15:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:15:37 -0400 Received: from zok.sgi.com ([204.94.215.101]:18902 "EHLO zok.sgi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 20 Sep 2001 16:15:25 -0400 Message-Id: <200109202016.f8KKGrL19642@jen.americas.sgi.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.2 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Alan Cox cc: austin@coremetrics.com (Gonyou, Austin), narancs@narancs.tii.matav.hu, linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: XFS to main kernel source In-Reply-To: Message from Alan Cox of "Thu, 20 Sep 2001 21:14:47 BST." Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:16:52 -0500 From: Steve Lord Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Won't there be a lot of changes which need to be made for it to go into 2.5 > > anyway though beyond just current development? Isn't 2.5 supposed to be > > "radically" different? > > Not really. 2.5 will change over time for certain but if anything the 2.5 > changes will make it easier. One problem area with XFS is that it duplicates > chunks of what should be generic functionality - and 2.5 needs to provide > the generic paths it wants Since we have your attention - which chunks? One of the frustrations we have had is the lack of feedback from anyone who has looked at XFS. Just interested. Steve