On Wed, 23 Aug 2000, Miles Lott wrote:
> Well, in looking at other kernel fs code, it seemed all the fs types
> were three letter abbreviations. If that is not a requirement, then
> yes beos is more natural. It is actually bfs, but SCO stuff conflicts
> there...
Ehrmm...
Let's see (this is from the v2.4-test tree, not v2.2.xx):
ntfs
hpfs
ext2(fs)
qnx4(fs)
ramfs
romfs
umsdos
vfat
sysv(fs)
coda
adfs
affs
cramfs
isofs
jffs
ncpfs
Not to be picky, but I'd say there are more 4-letter abbrevations than
three letter abbr's.
befs (not beos; the fs should be there to stress that it is a filesystem)
is a good name I think. beosfs might be a good name too.
> As for the 2.4 kernel version, I am hacking on it now. Mind you my
> major contribution to this this far is updating prior work.
Well, it's nice to hear you're working on it.
/David
_ _
// David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se> /> Northern lights wander \\
// Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky //
\> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ </ Full colour fire </
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 23 2000 - 21:00:09 EST