On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 12:01:42AM -0400, David Masover wrote:
A warning isn't good? Would you rather it be an error?
Of course not. It merely appears inconsistent to offer a root fs choice
that may cause severe problems at bootup time.
When I went to install my first SuSE (brand-new 6.1 at
Bernd Schubert wrote:
An alternative might be a reiser4 fuse port.
Fuse is not performance effective.
Bruce, I read your article on Linus and GPL V3, and I understand that
you are frustrated by his not going for V3. I suspect the main thing
that sparked your concern in writing the article about reiser4 is that I
am somehow doing something different that affects licensing, and not
conforming on
Pavel Machek wrote:
Yes, I'm afraid redundancy/checksums kill write speed,
they kill write speed to cache, but not to disk our compression
plugin is faster than the uncompressed plugin.
Edward Shishkin wrote:
Hans Reiser wrote:
Edward Shishkin wrote:
How about we switch to ecc, which would help with bit rot not sector
loss?
Interesting aspect.
Yes, we can implement ECC as a special crypto transform that inflates
data. As I mentioned earlier, it is possible via
On 02:28 Wed 09 Aug , Hans Reiser wrote:
Unfortunately, it's not one of which editors approve. It too easily
looks as though the writer is being influenced by the source.
If I were to do so, I'd risk being banned from publication.
Uhm... interesting. It's not that I have so much
On Wed 2006-08-09 02:37:45, Hans Reiser wrote:
Pavel Machek wrote:
Yes, I'm afraid redundancy/checksums kill write speed,
they kill write speed to cache, but not to disk our compression
plugin is faster than the uncompressed plugin.
Yes, you can get clever. But your
Pavel Machek wrote:
On Wed 2006-08-09 02:37:45, Hans Reiser wrote:
Pavel Machek wrote:
Yes, I'm afraid redundancy/checksums kill write speed,
they kill write speed to cache, but not to disk our compression
plugin is faster than the uncompressed plugin.
Yes, you
Yes, it looks like a business of node plugin, but AFAIK, you
objected against such checks:
Did I really? Well, I think that allowing users to choose whether to
checksum or not is a reasonable thing to allow them. I personally would
skip the checksum on my computer, but others
It could be
Hi,
I'm have a little problem with my reiser4 partition...
I can't mount it anymore and I'm unable to repair it.
I have a AMD64 platform with 64-bit Gentoo installed.
Here's the short story:
1. I was using kernel 2.6.16 with reiser4-2.6.16-4 patch
and I installed new 2.6.17 kernel with
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Yes, it looks like a business of node plugin, but AFAIK, you
objected against such checks:
Did I really? Well, I think that allowing users to choose whether to
checksum or not is a reasonable thing to allow them. I personally would
skip the checksum on my computer, but
Andreas Schäfer wrote:
On 02:28 Wed 09 Aug , Hans Reiser wrote:
Unfortunately, it's not one of which editors approve. It too easily
looks as though the writer is being influenced by the source.
If I were to do so, I'd risk being banned from publication.
Uhm... interesting. It's not
Hans Reiser wrote:
Pavel Machek wrote:
Yes, I'm afraid redundancy/checksums kill write speed,
they kill write speed to cache, but not to disk our compression
plugin is faster than the uncompressed plugin.
Regarding cache, do we do any sort of consistency checking for RAM, or
do
On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 02:28 -0600, Hans Reiser wrote:
Bruce, I read your article on Linus and GPL V3, and I understand that
you are frustrated by his not going for V3.
To be honest, it was more the fact that he made an obviously false
statement, and I happened to be in a position to know it
Bruce Byfield wrote:
Wow. I thought only the judiciary insulated itself from ever learning
of its mistakes that well.:-/
Oh, we have ways of learning. As witness this email exchange :)
You are right, it is only the judiciary.;-)
15 matches
Mail list logo
