Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-03-13 Thread Justin Young
ay, February 06, 2001 4:00 AM Subject: Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release > --- Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > > > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> SGI's XFS is in pre-release:

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-09 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- civileme <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... > If you care to submit a story to mandrakeforum about this, I will make sure > it is published. I think you are possibly overestimating our available time > to pursue opportunities, but mandrakeforum is where you can make your case > for one choic

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-09 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > [...] > > > > It's rather sad to see that SGI has written a patch to Anaconda to > support > > > XFS, and they don't care about our installer :-(.. > > > > No. I think what it's rather sad is y

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread civileme
On Wednesday 07 February 2001 13:37, you wrote: > --- "J . A . Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 02.06 Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > > > > best) ente

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread J . A . Magallon
On 02.07 Eugenio Diaz wrote: > > so don't tell me they don't play nice with others (as long as those others are > *willing*). > I do not say they do not play nice. I just say they will only worry about things working in RedHat even if nobody in RH would ask them 'cause they ship RedHat. If so

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > [...] > > > > > Why? Because nobody in our business development department could be > > > convinced that Mandrake has staying power due to t

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > > It's rather sad to see that SGI has written a patch to Anaconda to support > > XFS, and they don't care about our installer :-(.. > > No. I think what it's rather sad is your attitude, and that Mandrake have not my attitude?? > taken the ini

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- "J . A . Magallon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 02.06 Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > [...] > > > > > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > > > best) enterprise class file system. It brings > > > performance, scala

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > [...] > > > Why? Because nobody in our business development department could be > > convinced that Mandrake has staying power due to their weakness in the > > enterprise market. > > What wo

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- "Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 06:04:40PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > It's rather sad to see that SGI has written a patch to Anaconda to support > > XFS, and they don't care about our installe

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- Guillaume Cottenceau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > [...] > > > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > > best) enterprise class file system. It brings > > performance, scalability, security, QoS features, > > uptime, and more to

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release: fixing bugs

2001-02-07 Thread Leon Brooks
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > fixing bugs actually is much more > important that bringing features. Can you say that again? It's s refreshing to read... (-: -- Hiroshima '45 Chernobyl '86 Windows '95

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-07 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
"Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > Why? Because nobody in our business development department could be > convinced that Mandrake has staying power due to their weakness in the > enterprise market. What would you need to change the case? Having some professional services re

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread J . A . Magallon
On 02.06 Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > [...] > > > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > > best) enterprise class file system. It brings > > performance, scalability, security, QoS features, > > uptime, and more to Linux. I don't

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Brian J. Murrell
On Tue, Feb 06, 2001 at 06:04:40PM +0100, Guillaume Cottenceau wrote: > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > It's rather sad to see that SGI has written a patch to Anaconda to support > XFS, and they don't care about our installer :-(.. Want to know why? Because Mandrake is not taken se

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Guillaume Cottenceau
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > best) enterprise class file system. It brings > performance, scalability, security, QoS features, > uptime, and more to Linux. I don't think reiserfs and > XFS can be put in the same categor

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Tim McKenzie
> > > > XFS does other things too. And choice is aways good, > > unless you're > > packaging stuff. (-: > > Not only that, but XFS is a proven (in my opinion the > best) enterprise class file system. It brings > performance, scalability, security, QoS features, > uptime, and more to Linux. I don'

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Chmouel Boudjnah
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I forgot to mention that Mandrake bringing XFS up > before RedHat would win them big points on the > enterprise market, and those are the really paying > guys. sure definitively but well we are not 100 engineer in the kernel team and we can't do everyth

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> SGI's XFS is in pre-release: > > >> Any plans to include it in cooker. > > > not yet, we already have reiserfs for a journaling > file system. > > XFS does other things too.

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-06 Thread Eugenio Diaz
--- Leon Brooks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> SGI's XFS is in pre-release: > > >> Any plans to include it in cooker. > > > not yet, we already have reiserfs for a journaling > file system. > > XFS does other things too.

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-05 Thread Leon Brooks
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> SGI's XFS is in pre-release: >> Any plans to include it in cooker. > not yet, we already have reiserfs for a journaling file system. XFS does other things too. And choice is aways good, unless you're packaging stuff. (-:

Re: [Cooker] SGI's XFS pre-release

2001-02-05 Thread Chmouel Boudjnah
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > SGI's XFS is in pre-release: > > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/prerelease.html > > Any plans to include it in cooker. not yet, we already have reiserfs for a journaling file system. -- MandrakeSoft Inc http://www.chmouel.org