Re: [RFC 0/13] extents and 48bit ext3

Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.file-systems.ext2.devel,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.file-systems
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:30:06AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> And I'm not saying that just because it's a filesystem, and people get 
> upset if they lose data. No, I'm saying it because from a maintenance 
> standpoint, such a filesystem has almost zero cost.

One of the costs (and I'm not disagreeing with your main point;
I think forking ext3 to ext4 at this point is reasonable), is that
bugfixes applied to one don't necessarily get applied to the other.
I found some recently between ext2 and ext3, and submitted those, but I
only audited one file.  There's lots more to look at and I just haven't
found the time recently.  Going to three variations is a lot more work
for auditing, and it might be worth splitting some bits which genuinely
are the same into common code.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.