Re: [2.6] Most likely to be merged by Halloween... THE LIST

[David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>]

On Sat, Jul 20, 2002 at 03:30:29PM -0500, Austin Gonyou wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-07-20 at 16:05, Alan Cox wrote:
> ...
> > > > Do you think the breakdown is realistic?
> > > >
> > > > -- Guillaume
> > > 
> > > o EVMS (Enterprise Volume Management System)      (EVMS team)
> > 
> > or LVM2, which already appears to be scrubbed down and clean
> 
> Just IMHO, LVM2 makes better sense as there currently is no "stable"
> module for XFS in EVMS, AFAIK.
> Also, LVM is currently in 2.4 and a lot of peopel use it, LVM2 seems to
> be the proper progression for 2.6. My $0.02

I'd rather see the EVMS go in, if a choice has to be made between the
two. EVMS seems to have a lot of effort put in it, and has the
experience from the (very good) volume-managers that IBM have in OS/2
and AIX.

Afaik, EVMS supports LVM volumes. As for XFS, I'm sure an XFS module can
be produced for EVMS (then again, XFS isn't merged yet either...)


Regards: David Weinehall
  _                                                                 _
 // David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander      \\
//  Maintainer of the v2.0 kernel   //  Dance across the winter sky //
\>  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/    </   Full colour fire           </