Re: HFS, QNXFS

brettt (person@netcenter.net)
Thu, 14 Oct 1999 06:23:53 -0500


----- Original Message -----
From: David Weinehall <tao@acc.umu.se>
To: <asun@cobaltnet.com>; <scuba@wxs.nl>; <j@4u.net>
Cc: Linux Kernel Developer Mailing-list <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
Sent: Saturday, October 09, 1999 4:30 PM
Subject: HFS, QNXFS

> Both HFS and QNXFS has been in the kernel for quite some time, yet both
> are flagged Experimental.
>
> Is this still the case? Are they considered more unstable than other
> filesystems in the kernel? If they are considered unstable, HFS should
> be made if [ "$CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL" ] ...

I've used both and yes they are both still buggy and should remain marked
as such. Is anybody still actively maintaining them?

HFS at least seems like a good thing to have around when it actually works.
I havent looked at the code for HFS for quite some time so I dont know the
status of its progress.

I've sinned this week and now must use a windoze boxs. I cant easily get to
the code right now.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/