On Tuesday 10 June 2003 18:29, Alan Cox wrote:

> > Curious why a vanilla kernel would matter.  Frankly Linus is
> > the person I trust the least to come up with a stable kernel. 
> > XFS is the best filesystem for multimedia use, since you can
> > get almost raw disk/io performance on large sequential reads. 
> > If you don't want XFS I'd probably just go ext3.

It was my opinion too, that ext3 is the 2nd choice, before I started 
the thread, but I would like to hear the opinion of others.

> XFS is in the -ac patches nowdays and also in 2.5. It seems to be
> working well in both cases so I'm still hoping it can eventually
> fold into a 2.4

My problem is the following:
I patched 2.4.20 with patch-2.4.21-rc7.gz and the 
grsecurity-1.9.10-2.4.21.patch, which works fine, but if I patch 
with patch-2.4.21-rc7-ac1.gz too there are errors. It doesn't 
matter which patch I use first.

Unfortunately I didn't find a XFS-patch for 2.4.21 too. So the only 
way for *me* to build a XFS-kernel is to patch-2.4.21-rc7-ac1.gz 
and this results in problems with grsecurity. One reason why I want 
grsecurity is the kernel-option CONFIG_GRKERNSEC_RANDID.

Since I am not a coder, the only way for *me* seems to be to change 
from XFS to a filesystem which is included in the original 
vanilla-kernel.

Al


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:  Etnus, makers of TotalView, The best
thread debugger on the planet. Designed with thread debugging features
you've never dreamed of, try TotalView 6 free at www.etnus.com.
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users

Reply via email to