Re: [PATCH][2/2] SquashFS

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> >Perhaps squashfs is good enough improvement over cramfs... But I'd
> >like those 4Gb limits to go away.
> 
> So would I.  But it is a totally groundless reason to refuse kernel 
> submission because of that, Squashfs users are quite happily using it 
> with such a "terrible" limitation.  I'm asking for Squashfs to be put in 
> the kernel _now_ because users are asking me to do it _now_.  If it 

Putting it into kernel because users want it is... not a good
reason. You should put it there if it is right thing to do. I believe
you should address those endianness issues and drop V1 support. If
breaking 4GB limit does not involve on-disk format change, it may be
okay to merge. After code is merged, doing format changes will be
hard...

								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/