[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OpenBSD and FS-Support (compiling kernel without support..)
Quoting Thorsten Glaser (email@example.com):
> Dixitur illum firstname.lastname@example.org scribere...
> >I've never been really clear why non-native file system support
> >isn't done via a kernel module.
> Because this is not the (Open)BSD philosophy.
> We don't need to modularize the kernel. It's good as it is.
"change is bad" - I like it.
Nice view. I've got 4.2BSD on QIC60s somewhere if you want
to stick with that.
kernel modules let me:
- not load things I don't need (union, ext2fs, several dozen other
things) - to let me run a smaller kernel
- load modules which might have GPL or other non-BSD licensed code
(which a reiserfs modules would likely have).
- load and unload modules while debugging, rather than
code, compile a kernel, boot, hope it works, debug.
RATHER: modload module, try new calls, hopefully modunload.
Sometimes it eats it and you reboot with either path.
/usr/ports/kernelmods/ would be a fine way to carry non-BSD
licensed modules and maintain the integrity of the goals.
> [...] if maybe ext3fs wasn't a better pick, or jfs, or maybe reiserfs, oh but
> what about xfs, and if only i had waited until reiser4 was ready... in the be-
> ginning, there was ffs, and in the middle, there was ffs, and at the end, there
> was still ffs, and the sys admins knew it was good. :) -- Ted Unangst ?ber *fs
Right, we can list the shortcomings of FFS. Esp FFS1. Snapshots
in FFS2 let me do really cool things, now we just need fast directories.
Ever have a machine with 1TB mounted go down hard? With XFS (and reiser
and VxFS, and others), there is no fsck. There is no need for fsck.
find / >/dev/null
takes < 1second on reiserfs and around 10 minutes on FFS and HFS+.
(similar number of files).