Re: Remove NTFS kernel support

In message:
<3bbf2fe10802070621h574f5d3kb4fbd86adbab11cmail.gmail.com>
            "Attilio Rao" <attiliofreebsd.org> writes:
: 2008/2/7, Alfred Perlstein <alfredfreebsd.org>:
: > * Attilio Rao <attiliofreebsd.org> [080207
06:13] wrote:
: > > 2008/2/7, Andre Oppermann <andrefreebsd.org>:
: > > > Eric Anderson wrote:
: > > > > I think Alfred's point is really
interesting.  How many people that
: > > > > don't use it that say 'axe it' does it
take to override 1 person saying
: > > > > 'keep it!'?
: > > >
: > > > The real question is how many people does
it take to say 'I'll maintain
: > > > it'?  Just one.  Without it, it will only
bitrot as evidenced by Attilios
: > > > question.  NTFS is currently broken, just
not as obvious because WITNESS
: > > > didn't track and enforce lockmgr locks.
: > >
: > > Andre catched exactly my point.
: > > The big problem is that we have a list of
several unmaintained fs.
: > > NTFS is in this list. The support is not
reliable, it is only
: > > available in read mode and eventually bugged.
: > > I'm not sure I want to keep this if nobody wants
to maintain it.
: >
: > All I'm saying is that I think this is a bit
premature considering
: > the users.  Within less than 24hrs we've had a few
users reporting
: > in as users, I'm sure the fixes (now that we have
some good assertions)
: > are going to be trivial.
: >
: > Why not let it ferment/rot for a release cycle and
then see what
: > the story is?
: 
: Obviously if we can fix it is better, but axing is an
opportunity I
: don't want to leave out and this is why I wanted to poll
users about
: this issue. Eventually, if an axing is decided, it won't
happen in
: short times but only once all situations for
"migration" will be
: probed and finished.

WE SHOULD NOT AXE IT.  IT IS TOO USEFUL.  VERY RECENTLY IT
WORKED VERY
WELL.

There's a lot of other systems in the tree that aren't
nearly as
useful that nobody is complaining about that are actually in
much
worse shape.

Warner
_______________________________________________
freebsd-fsfreebsd.org mailing list

http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-fs-unsubscribefreebsd.org"

In message: <20080207.163454.-1471235838.impbsdimp.com>
            "M. Warner Losh" <impbsdimp.com> writes:
: In message:
<3bbf2fe10802070621h574f5d3kb4fbd86adbab11cmail.gmail.com>
:             "Attilio Rao" <attiliofreebsd.org> writes:
: : 2008/2/7, Alfred Perlstein <alfredfreebsd.org>:
: : > * Attilio Rao <attiliofreebsd.org> [080207
06:13] wrote:
: : > > 2008/2/7, Andre Oppermann <andrefreebsd.org>:
: : > > > Eric Anderson wrote:
: : > > > > I think Alfred's point is really
interesting.  How many people that
: : > > > > don't use it that say 'axe it' does
it take to override 1 person saying
: : > > > > 'keep it!'?
: : > > >
: : > > > The real question is how many people does
it take to say 'I'll maintain
: : > > > it'?  Just one.  Without it, it will only
bitrot as evidenced by Attilios
: : > > > question.  NTFS is currently broken, just
not as obvious because WITNESS
: : > > > didn't track and enforce lockmgr locks.
: : > >
: : > > Andre catched exactly my point.
: : > > The big problem is that we have a list of
several unmaintained fs.
: : > > NTFS is in this list. The support is not
reliable, it is only
: : > > available in read mode and eventually bugged.
: : > > I'm not sure I want to keep this if nobody
wants to maintain it.
: : >
: : > All I'm saying is that I think this is a bit
premature considering
: : > the users.  Within less than 24hrs we've had a few
users reporting
: : > in as users, I'm sure the fixes (now that we have
some good assertions)
: : > are going to be trivial.
: : >
: : > Why not let it ferment/rot for a release cycle and
then see what
: : > the story is?
: : 
: : Obviously if we can fix it is better, but axing is an
opportunity I
: : don't want to leave out and this is why I wanted to poll
users about
: : this issue. Eventually, if an axing is decided, it won't
happen in
: : short times but only once all situations for
"migration" will be
: : probed and finished.
: 
: WE SHOULD NOT AXE IT.  IT IS TOO USEFUL.  VERY RECENTLY IT
WORKED VERY
: WELL.
: 
: There's a lot of other systems in the tree that aren't
nearly as
: useful that nobody is complaining about that are actually
in much
: worse shape.

OK.  I shouldn't have shouted.  My basic point is that ntfs
worked
very recently, and therefore we owe it to ourselves to give
it some
time to get fixed.  fuse is unknown, not even in head and
the
performance characteristics between the two aren't known. 
Also, I use
ntfs to recover data from "crashed" disks because
it copes well with
bad spots on the disk.  None of the other filesystems in the
tree does
this, and that makes it a very powerful tool for dealing
with crashed
disks that others say are unrecoverable.

Warner
_______________________________________________
freebsd-fsfreebsd.org mailing list

http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-fs
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-fs-unsubscribefreebsd.org"