On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Jedi/Sector One wrote:
> Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > IMHO, even if an fs was bug-free in 2.2.x, lack of testing under the new
> > 2.3.x VFS implies an experimental and possibly non-working nature.
>
> The QNXFS is not bug-free in 2.2.x . It is useable to share some files
Jeff Garzik wrote:
> IMHO, even if an fs was bug-free in 2.2.x, lack of testing under the new
> 2.3.x VFS implies an experimental and possibly non-working nature.
The QNXFS is not bug-free in 2.2.x . It is useable to share some files
between Linux and QNX, and when QNX is screwed up, this is re
On Mon, 11 Oct 1999, Guest section DW wrote:
> > Somebody had touched qnx/inode.c in 2.3.19
> > maybe they will show up and tell what is going on?
>
> That was me.
> I noticed that if one had qnx4 compiled into the kernel
> and did a mount without explicit -t option of some fs
> that came late
> Somebody had touched qnx/inode.c in 2.3.19
> maybe they will show up and tell what is going on?
That was me.
I noticed that if one had qnx4 compiled into the kernel
and did a mount without explicit -t option of some fs
that came later in the list then the system would crash.
In other words, al
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> (re-directed to linux-fsdevel)
>
> Guest section DW wrote:
> >
> > > Both HFS and QNXFS has been in the kernel for quite some time,
> > > yet both are flagged Experimental.
> >
> > Just as well. At least qnx4 still contains bad bugs.
> > I have no in
David Weinehall wrote:
> Well, if we're to base the (EXPERIMENTAL) based on that it hasn't been
> rewritten for v2.3.x, several other filesystems should be marked...
There's your answer.
IMHO, even if an fs was bug-free in 2.2.x, lack of testing under the new
2.3.x VFS implies an experimental an
On Sun, 10 Oct 1999, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> (re-directed to linux-fsdevel)
>
> Guest section DW wrote:
> >
> > > Both HFS and QNXFS has been in the kernel for quite some time,
> > > yet both are flagged Experimental.
> >
> > Just as well. At least qnx4 still contains bad bugs.
> > I have no info
(re-directed to linux-fsdevel)
Guest section DW wrote:
>
> > Both HFS and QNXFS has been in the kernel for quite some time,
> > yet both are flagged Experimental.
>
> Just as well. At least qnx4 still contains bad bugs.
> I have no information on hfs.
Someone (A. Viro?) posted recently to linu
