On Sat, Aug 28, 2004 at 04:05:02PM +0400, Alexander Lyamin wrote: > > But one could even say VFS is integral part of a linux filesystem as > > it does most of the work a filesystem driver does in other operating > > systems. > > theres no "linux filesystem". there are "linux filesystems". > thanks god.
a linux filesystem, not the linux filesystem, please read again. > But I it would be really grate if you'll elaborate your sentence with > example of VFS functionality (lack of it) on said "other operating systems" > and if you'll define "most of work". most trivial example is namespace locking, in *BSD, Windows, SVR4 and derivates it's done in the lowlevel filesystem. In plan9, Linux and soon DragonlyBSD it's done in the VFS. > > > P.S. I imagine, how much flamed it would be if reiser4 made any intensive > > > changes in linux VFS code... > > > > It really depends on how you sent them. If you had a big patch without > > explanations - sure. > It would work with small tweaks, but you just can take a look at reiser4 > code and you'll understand that it just could not be chopped in > "set of small patches" altough it could be documented better ofcourse, > but its really well commented already. > > some times, some approaches to some problems just would not work. You still haven't even bother explaining what you want to do. It's hard to argue against vague uncertainity.