Hi!
If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
tree.
The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would allow for
broader testing of the code and a step towards a more embedded ready NetBSD.
Cheers.
In article <46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop>,
Adam Hoka wrote:
>Hi!
>
>If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
>tree.
>
>The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would allow for
>broader testing of the code and a step towards a more emb
In article <46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop>,
Adam Hoka wrote:
>Hi!
>
>If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
>tree.
>
>The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would allow for
>broader testing of the code and a step towards a more emb
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:03 AM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop>,
> Adam Hoka wrote:
>>Hi!
>>
>>If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
>>tree.
>>
>>The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would al
On 11/23/2011 6:03 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop>,
> Adam Hoka wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>> If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
>> tree.
>>
>> The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would allow fo
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 05:03:36PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> >If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the NetBSD
> >tree.
> >
> >The import would have minimal impact on existing code, but would
> >allow for broader testing of the code and a step towards a more
>
chris...@astron.com (Christos Zoulas) wrote:
> I think that we should choose a more descriptive name for it. Having
> cute project names is good during development, but we need meaningful
> names for posterity that make sense to people. Imagine if we had named
> nfs cutefs, ffs kirkfs, etc.
Second
> I'm thinking of shortening it to CHFS, and we could say it stands for
> chip file system if someone asks.
FWIW, a very brief google for `CHFS filesystem` indicates no direct hits -
only matches for chfs(1), pretty much.
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:24:43 +0100, Adam Hoka wrote:
On 11/23/2011 6:03 PM, Christos Zoulas wrote:
In article <46DA345771B043F283B5E67C674DAA76@desktop>,
Adam Hoka wrote:
Hi!
If no one argues otherwise, I would like to import chewiefs to the
NetBSD
tree.
The import would have minimal im
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011, Tamas Toth wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 19:24:43 +0100, Adam Hoka wrote:
I'm thinking of shortening it to CHFS, and we could say it stands for
chip file system if someone asks.
CHFS would be also good for us.
Why not simply "ChipFS"?
Seems more reasonable pronunciati
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:56:13AM +0100, Magnus Eriksson wrote:
> Why not simply "ChipFS"?
>
> Seems more reasonable pronunciation-wise than the alphabet soup that
> is "see-age-eff-ess" or the cough and spit of "ch-fs".
I may be chiming in too late, but I suggest calling the filesystem
SneezeFS
11 matches
Mail list logo