Re: Redhat Linux 9.0 & XFS support
On Fri, 2003-03-28 at 05:35, Michael Mansour wrote: > I have to agree there, I find it really strange that > XFS isn't fully native to the Red Hat installation, > it's a really good filesystem and supported on all > major distributions, except for Red Hat. > > I used to run Red Hat 7.3 with XFS (using the SGI > ISO's I downloaded from the SGI site). The author of > those ISO's had said the RH 7.3 XFS ISO release was > the last he'll provide, that anyone wanting them for > any Red Hat future releases should ask Red Hat to > implement them by default in their distributions. > After moving to Red Hat 8.0 I was surprised Red Hat > didn't include the support natively. JFYI, there are SGI/RH 8.0 ISOs (which is what I'm running on all my PCs) available at both http://linuxiso.org/ and from SGI themselves: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.2/installer/ > > Definately makes one wonder why there seems to be > reluctance there... Probably lack of resources, although given SGI's work (modifying the RH installer to support XFS) you'd think that the resources would be minimal. -- Cliff Wells, Software Engineer Logiplex Corporation (www.logiplex.net) (503) 978-6726 x308 (800) 735-0555 x308 -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Redhat Linux 9.0 & XFS support
I have to agree there, I find it really strange that XFS isn't fully native to the Red Hat installation, it's a really good filesystem and supported on all major distributions, except for Red Hat. I used to run Red Hat 7.3 with XFS (using the SGI ISO's I downloaded from the SGI site). The author of those ISO's had said the RH 7.3 XFS ISO release was the last he'll provide, that anyone wanting them for any Red Hat future releases should ask Red Hat to implement them by default in their distributions. After moving to Red Hat 8.0 I was surprised Red Hat didn't include the support natively. Definately makes one wonder why there seems to be reluctance there... --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 28 Mar 2003, Michael Wardle wrote: > > > On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 03:29, Ubaidul Khan wrote: > > > Does anyone know if Redhat 9.0 will provide > support of XFS (sgi's high > > > performance file system)? I heard some talk of > the new kernel (2.4.21) > > > supporting XFS. > > > > I don't see any mention of XFS in the ChangeLog > for Linux 2.4.21. > > > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/testing/patch-2.4.21.log > > > > When last I read about this issue, it seemed that > XFS support would only > > be merged in to the official kernel for Linux 2.6 > and later, and Red Hat > > didn't want to apply the patches to Linux 2.4. I > would conclude that > > we'll see XFS in the first Red Hat release to use > Linux 2.6 by default, > > perhaps Red Hat 9.1 or 10, depending on what the > next release is called. > > > > You can get a CD image of an SGI-customized > version of Red Hat 8 that > > includes XFS support from here: > > > ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.2/installer/ > > Depends on how you define as "see" in terms of how > you expect the > availablity to be provided. Red Hat seems to be > very conservative when it > comes to file system support. Also, the fact that > ext3 seems to be their > own in-house salid dressing seems to make the bias > in continuing to > promote it. > > Based on what I have seen in the beta releases, > Anaconda still does not > list reiserfs as an option during installation. The > fact that the support > is included in the kernel and the user-space > utilities are provided seem > to be an after-thought. Like other secondary > offerings in the standard OS > (CUPS, postfix, etc), it may be weeks after a know > bug exists before they > get around to releasing a kernel update or updated > reiserfs util package. > It is clear they don't want to provide support to > alternatives when you > compare this with the fact that new kernels or other > packages (bugs with > ext3, lpd, sendmail, etc) will come out days after a > know bug. Even if > SGI XFS or IBM JFS is provided in RH 9.1 or RH X > kernel (along with > supporting user-space utils), it is unlikely that RH > trend will change and > they will continue blowing off supporting the users > of these alternatives. > Unless your interested in tracking bugzilla and > RawHide, I would avoid > alternatives when expecting support from RH. What > gets provided when you > run "up2date" against RH's own RHN servers seems to > be controlled by > politics rather than technical. > > What I find the most disappointing is how much Red > Hat has gone out of > their way to avoid devfs. While it is debatable if > this 2.4 kernel > feature is worth while in a hard drive installed OS, > it has become clear > that it has it's advantages for rescue diskettes. > Yet, work-arounds for > detection and creation of devices still exist as > part of Anaconda when > booting in either install or rescue mode. There are > several cases where > devfs provides a more complette set of device nodes > that Anaconda does. > This can make a huge difference in the complexity of > your rescue > procedures. For example, restoring a file from tape > may be an easier task > with devfs but Anaconda seems to lack creating the > approbate device files > for accessing tape drive. Hence, an explaination of > how to use mknod > becomes part of any documentation on how to restore > a file from tape while > booting a RH CD in rescue mode. > > It much like RH's attitude towards ext3 over > reiserfs, it seem RH doesn't > care for the fact that devfs wasn't invented at RH > but the Anaconda device > node creator work-around was. "Not invented here" > attitude can carry over > to both XFS and JFS as well. > > > > -- > redhat-list mailing list > unsubscribe > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! http://platinum.yahoo.com -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Redhat Linux 9.0 & XFS support
On 28 Mar 2003, Michael Wardle wrote: > On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 03:29, Ubaidul Khan wrote: > > Does anyone know if Redhat 9.0 will provide support of XFS (sgi's high > > performance file system)? I heard some talk of the new kernel (2.4.21) > > supporting XFS. > > I don't see any mention of XFS in the ChangeLog for Linux 2.4.21. > http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/testing/patch-2.4.21.log > > When last I read about this issue, it seemed that XFS support would only > be merged in to the official kernel for Linux 2.6 and later, and Red Hat > didn't want to apply the patches to Linux 2.4. I would conclude that > we'll see XFS in the first Red Hat release to use Linux 2.6 by default, > perhaps Red Hat 9.1 or 10, depending on what the next release is called. > > You can get a CD image of an SGI-customized version of Red Hat 8 that > includes XFS support from here: > ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.2/installer/ Depends on how you define as "see" in terms of how you expect the availablity to be provided. Red Hat seems to be very conservative when it comes to file system support. Also, the fact that ext3 seems to be their own in-house salid dressing seems to make the bias in continuing to promote it. Based on what I have seen in the beta releases, Anaconda still does not list reiserfs as an option during installation. The fact that the support is included in the kernel and the user-space utilities are provided seem to be an after-thought. Like other secondary offerings in the standard OS (CUPS, postfix, etc), it may be weeks after a know bug exists before they get around to releasing a kernel update or updated reiserfs util package. It is clear they don't want to provide support to alternatives when you compare this with the fact that new kernels or other packages (bugs with ext3, lpd, sendmail, etc) will come out days after a know bug. Even if SGI XFS or IBM JFS is provided in RH 9.1 or RH X kernel (along with supporting user-space utils), it is unlikely that RH trend will change and they will continue blowing off supporting the users of these alternatives. Unless your interested in tracking bugzilla and RawHide, I would avoid alternatives when expecting support from RH. What gets provided when you run "up2date" against RH's own RHN servers seems to be controlled by politics rather than technical. What I find the most disappointing is how much Red Hat has gone out of their way to avoid devfs. While it is debatable if this 2.4 kernel feature is worth while in a hard drive installed OS, it has become clear that it has it's advantages for rescue diskettes. Yet, work-arounds for detection and creation of devices still exist as part of Anaconda when booting in either install or rescue mode. There are several cases where devfs provides a more complette set of device nodes that Anaconda does. This can make a huge difference in the complexity of your rescue procedures. For example, restoring a file from tape may be an easier task with devfs but Anaconda seems to lack creating the approbate device files for accessing tape drive. Hence, an explaination of how to use mknod becomes part of any documentation on how to restore a file from tape while booting a RH CD in rescue mode. It much like RH's attitude towards ext3 over reiserfs, it seem RH doesn't care for the fact that devfs wasn't invented at RH but the Anaconda device node creator work-around was. "Not invented here" attitude can carry over to both XFS and JFS as well. -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Re: Redhat Linux 9.0 & XFS support
On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 03:29, Ubaidul Khan wrote: > Does anyone know if Redhat 9.0 will provide support of XFS (sgi's high > performance file system)? I heard some talk of the new kernel (2.4.21) > supporting XFS. I don't see any mention of XFS in the ChangeLog for Linux 2.4.21. http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/testing/patch-2.4.21.log When last I read about this issue, it seemed that XFS support would only be merged in to the official kernel for Linux 2.6 and later, and Red Hat didn't want to apply the patches to Linux 2.4. I would conclude that we'll see XFS in the first Red Hat release to use Linux 2.6 by default, perhaps Red Hat 9.1 or 10, depending on what the next release is called. You can get a CD image of an SGI-customized version of Red Hat 8 that includes XFS support from here: ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/Release-1.2/installer/ -- Michael Wardle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Adacel Technologies -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
Redhat Linux 9.0 & XFS support
Does anyone know if Redhat 9.0 will provide support of XFS (sgi's high performance file system)? I heard some talk of the new kernel (2.4.21) supporting XFS. Thanks -- Ubaidul Khan Wayne State University Library Systems (313)577-4008 -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
