| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Do you need Reiser4? |
| It would be great to have it with gentoo-dev-sources and/or gentoo-sources |
|
65% |
[ 367 ] |
| It is enough if it works with other sources. |
|
15% |
[ 88 ] |
| I don't need Reiser4 at all, so I don't care. |
|
18% |
[ 103 ] |
| What is Reiser4? |
|
0% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 560 |
|
| Author |
Message |
yngwin
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:05 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| gentoo_lan wrote: | However unless you enjoy data loss, I would wait for a long time to use Reiser4...perhaps forever. |
It is exactly because I don't enjoy data loss that I am so happy with Reiser4. It actually is the only filesystem that has never let me down. The only thing is its incompatibility with Apache2. But I never had data loss with Reiser4. I did have data loss with ext3 and XFS. Those experiences have made me a strong supporter of Reiser4. I'm not technical enough to see the 'bad by design' point, but it works for me and that is what counts in the end.
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
playfool
l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Ã
rhus, Denmark
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yngwin wrote: | | gentoo_lan wrote: | | However unless you enjoy data loss, I would wait for a long time to use Reiser4...perhaps forever. |
It is exactly because I don't enjoy data loss that I am so happy with Reiser4. It actually is the only filesystem that has never let me down. The only thing is its incompatibility with Apache2. But I never had data loss with Reiser4. I did have data loss with ext3 and XFS. Those experiences have made me a strong supporter of Reiser4. I'm not technical enough to see the 'bad by design' point, but it works for me and that is what counts in the end. |
I think that's quite a common observation, it works well for you - you don't know what's going on behind the scenes, it might be ugly, it might be good - but for you, life is peachy - your data seems safe and generally speedy.
Nothing wrong with that, in fact I think it's a strong endorsement of Reiser4 on user merits (it doesn't blow up), technical merit - well I think we should all leave that to the kernel developers - however it is important to stress that so far, I have yet to loose data to Reiser4 as well in my trial runs (I have no run Reiser4 for anything serious and I don't intend to either for various reasons), that doesn't on the other hand mean that we should just let it in, surely it needs to comply with kernel standards and such.
As for including it in gentoo-sources, one has to remember that any delta gentoo keeps with upstream, is a net cost in development time, time that could otherwise go to things of interest - such as fixing drivers or writing new ones (like the wonderful dsd does.. much kudos man, you're my hero). So do we really need it in gentoo-sources, I think not, let it get into vanilla, then support is cheap any bugs can be filed against one code base and qualified developers (namesys I guess, since it's their code) can work on them. Try not to think of this as someone depriving you of a feature, think of it as time going from pointless maintance to useful bugfixing, be you a Reiser4 supporter or a naysayer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djm
Arch/Herd Tester
Joined: 12 Apr 2004
Posts: 690
Location: Wadham College, Oxford
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| playfool wrote: | | As for including it in gentoo-sources, one has to remember that any delta gentoo keeps with upstream, is a net cost in development time, time that could otherwise go to things of interest - such as fixing drivers or writing new ones (like the wonderful dsd does.. much kudos man, you're my hero). So do we really need it in gentoo-sources, I think not, let it get into vanilla, then support is cheap any bugs can be filed against one code base and qualified developers (namesys I guess, since it's their code) can work on them. Try not to think of this as someone depriving you of a feature, think of it as time going from pointless maintance to useful bugfixing, be you a Reiser4 supporter or a naysayer. |
There's also the respect from other kernel developers issue. Since the number of patches in gentoo-sources has been reduced (and patches largely only being bug fixes and things that will be in vanilla sources very soon), upstream take gentoo-sources and bug reports about them much more seriously, and talk to dsd a lot more about what they are doing. For that reason alone reiser4 isn't going to go into gentoo-sources until it's in vanilla, regardless of what anyone thinks about the merit of reiser4 itself.
_________________
the forums.gentoo.org poster formally known as metal leper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superstoned
Guru
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 05, 2005 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| djm wrote: | | playfool wrote: | | As for including it in gentoo-sources, one has to remember that any delta gentoo keeps with upstream, is a net cost in development time, time that could otherwise go to things of interest - such as fixing drivers or writing new ones (like the wonderful dsd does.. much kudos man, you're my hero). So do we really need it in gentoo-sources, I think not, let it get into vanilla, then support is cheap any bugs can be filed against one code base and qualified developers (namesys I guess, since it's their code) can work on them. Try not to think of this as someone depriving you of a feature, think of it as time going from pointless maintance to useful bugfixing, be you a Reiser4 supporter or a naysayer. |
There's also the respect from other kernel developers issue. Since the number of patches in gentoo-sources has been reduced (and patches largely only being bug fixes and things that will be in vanilla sources very soon), upstream take gentoo-sources and bug reports about them much more seriously, and talk to dsd a lot more about what they are doing. For that reason alone reiser4 isn't going to go into gentoo-sources until it's in vanilla, regardless of what anyone thinks about the merit of reiser4 itself. |
and i think that's ok. those who want reiser4 can patch it in themselves, or use a patchset which contains it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VeliuX
n00b
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 17
Location: Washington/Illinois/USA
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 7:12 pm Post subject: sorry |
|
|
Hello, I am sorry if my last post seemed like a flame. I am just trying to save some people some time, and frusteration. But
I am sorry superstoned, it wasnt fud, just google LKML and you will know what i mean. I am more upset with the people who promote such ignorant things like so called "Safe Cflags" and so called "Safe Filesystems". They are the people that put a bad name on linux itself. But if you must go ahead and waste your time, just dont file bug reports and dont come whining when something breaks. Thanks
-note: Flame is spelled Flame not flaim. For future reference.
_________________
-Baer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superstoned
Guru
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 10:13 pm Post subject: Re: sorry |
|
|
| VeliuX wrote: | | Hello, I am sorry if my last post seemed like a flame. I am just trying to save some people some time, and frusteration. But I am sorry superstoned, it wasnt fud, just google LKML and you will know what i mean. |
they're still opinions.
| VeliuX wrote: | | I am more upset with the people who promote such ignorant things like so called "Safe Cflags" and so called "Safe Filesystems". They are the people that put a bad name on linux itself. But if you must go ahead and waste your time, just dont file bug reports and dont come whining when something breaks. Thanks |
hey, you should be thankfull for all those ppl that are willing to try new things. thanx to them you have stable OSS! i can see why you don't wanna try reiser4 or experiment with new useflags. but if no-one did, how did we get new speedups in bootup? or new io schedulers like cfq (which outperforms the old one, i happened to have helped debugging it. yes, it caused crashes here. even dataloss. but now YOU can use it... safely...).
| VeliuX wrote: | | -note: Flame is spelled Flame not flaim. For future reference. |
srry, not native english... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
playfool
l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Ã
rhus, Denmark
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 12:16 am Post subject: Re: sorry |
|
|
| superstoned wrote: | [hey, you should be thankfull for all those ppl that are willing to try new things. thanx to them you have stable OSS! i can see why you don't wanna try reiser4 or experiment with new useflags. but if no-one did, how did we get new speedups in bootup? or new io schedulers like cfq (which outperforms the old one, i happened to have helped debugging it. yes, it caused crashes here. even dataloss. but now YOU can use it... safely...).
|
Maybe: Research by qualified people, reading documentation, applying known concepts, profiling, reading standards.. most certainly you wouldn't take credit for any great leaps of mankind in the name of ricerhood?
Now I'm all for testing experimental code, if you understand the risks and you do so with the understanding of how to tell qualified people fix it by providing proper feedback or doing it yourself. Thus people qualified to test such code would be in a state of being able to at least apply a patch without assistance and to follow simple instructions like do not file bugs with your vendor.
I beg you please don't argue for a case that leads to dsd wasting his valuable time, like all the other developers he does this in his spare time because he wants to - burdening him with attitional patches to maintain which are known to be buggy and which are on the fast track to lkml peer review and since inclusion in vanilla... wait or apply it yourself, please. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superstoned
Guru
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 10:01 am Post subject: Re: sorry |
|
|
| playfool wrote: | | superstoned wrote: | [hey, you should be thankfull for all those ppl that are willing to try new things. thanx to them you have stable OSS! i can see why you don't wanna try reiser4 or experiment with new useflags. but if no-one did, how did we get new speedups in bootup? or new io schedulers like cfq (which outperforms the old one, i happened to have helped debugging it. yes, it caused crashes here. even dataloss. but now YOU can use it... safely...).
|
Maybe: Research by qualified people, reading documentation, applying known concepts, profiling, reading standards.. most certainly you wouldn't take credit for any great leaps of mankind in the name of ricerhood?
Now I'm all for testing experimental code, if you understand the risks and you do so with the understanding of how to tell qualified people fix it by providing proper feedback or doing it yourself. Thus people qualified to test such code would be in a state of being able to at least apply a patch without assistance and to follow simple instructions like do not file bugs with your vendor.
I beg you please don't argue for a case that leads to dsd wasting his valuable time, like all the other developers he does this in his spare time because he wants to - burdening him with attitional patches to maintain which are known to be buggy and which are on the fast track to lkml peer review and since inclusion in vanilla... wait or apply it yourself, please. |
lets quote myself here:
| superstoned wrote: | | djm wrote: | | There's also the respect from other kernel developers issue. Since the number of patches in gentoo-sources has been reduced (and patches largely only being bug fixes and things that will be in vanilla sources very soon), upstream take gentoo-sources and bug reports about them much more seriously, and talk to dsd a lot more about what they are doing. For that reason alone reiser4 isn't going to go into gentoo-sources until it's in vanilla, regardless of what anyone thinks about the merit of reiser4 itself. |
and i think that's ok. those who want reiser4 can patch it in themselves, or use a patchset which contains it. |
i didn't want to use the fact code has to be tested (and in the FOSS world, ordinary users have to do that) to say "include reiser4 in the gentoo-patches", but i DID want to say people should not be discouraged too much to try out new things. as long as we tell them it can be unsafe, and as long as they are willing to invest some time to help pin down the bug, they are doing a good thing. i'm no coder, but i can add a patch to a kernel, fix one or two rejects, and test the result. so, i can help, in some way. and i KNOW jens and con and other (kernel) hackers appreciate that. of course, they rather had a patch. but they can't stabilize their code unless someone tests it.
i think we shouldn't be so negative about 'ricers', as long as we tell them they must be willing to invest some time and effort to help fix problems they encounter. they are, after all, on the 'front' of technology.
and no, i don't consider myself a ricer. -O2 is my way of life... but i DO help test new features in the kernel (like the new swap-prefetch con is working on) and i run KDE SVN to help find bugs and suggest new additions. now, does that make me a bad person? no! actually, imho we need more ppl that do such things, instead of (wine about others) complaining about instabillity - help fix things! some 'grow' and become coders, or help in other places (me, i help translate articles and help man KDE boots in the netherlands. wouldn't have done that if i never 'dived' into the great community that surrounds KDE).
and sorry for my english, correct me/ask me if its not clear what i'm trying to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yngwin
Retired Dev
Joined: 19 Dec 2002
Posts: 4572
Location: Suzhou, China
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 08, 2005 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| playfool wrote: | | yngwin wrote: | | It is exactly because I don't enjoy data loss that I am so happy with Reiser4. It actually is the only filesystem that has never let me down. ... I'm not technical enough to see the 'bad by design' point, but it works for me and that is what counts in the end. |
I think that's quite a common observation, it works well for you - you don't know what's going on behind the scenes, it might be ugly, it might be good - but for you, life is peachy - your data seems safe and generally speedy.
Nothing wrong with that, in fact I think it's a strong endorsement of Reiser4 on user merits (it doesn't blow up), technical merit - well I think we should all leave that to the kernel developers - |
I agree with you there. I understand that Reiser4 is quite controversial - yes, I do read LKML occassionally, and if I understand 25% of what's going on I consider myself happy. So I'm not pushing for Reiser4 to go into vanilla, or in gentoo(-dev)-sources for that matter. I'll leave that to the knowledgeable people in charge. Because in the end no-one is served with instability in vanilla or users swamping the Gentoo devs with support questions for a feature which is arguably still experimental.
Personally, I am very happy with Reiser4 as well as the opportunities that Gentoo offers. Anyone who wants can find patches that include Reiser4 (I'm using nitro myself) and test it. Anyone who wants can unmask experimental ebuilds or get an overlay and test stuff. All this is quite easy to do with portage. So a big thank you to our devs!
And yes, it is good and necessary to have testers, but we need people that know and accept the risks involved. I think portage allows us to do so without too much hassle. So I agree with my fellow coutryman above. Nice to see you, superstoned!
_________________
"Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." - Abraham Lincoln
Free Culture | Defective by Design | EFF |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superstoned
Guru
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 09, 2005 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
* Superstoned says hi to yngwin
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aonoa
Guru
Joined: 23 May 2002
Posts: 589
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Reiser4 has for a while now and is currently working nicely for me. The laptop has lost battery and powered off many times without any data loss at all. I'm only starting to think it might be the reason for my samba troubles, oh well. Things need to be tried and tested in order to be improved. I might not know how to look at FS code and such, but it works. So far.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i92guboj
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10315
Location: Córdoba (Spain)
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 8:34 pm Post subject: Re: sorry |
|
|
| superstoned wrote: | i think we shouldn't be so negative about 'ricers', as long as we tell them they must be willing to invest some time and effort to help fix problems they encounter. they are, after all, on the 'front' of technology.
|
Anyone can do what s/he wants, including ricers, but I disagree in one thing. Serious bugtesters dont test on a fully unstable system, never. That is not the way to go to test things, because the problem can arise in any place. If you want to test or depurate programs you need to have a stable environment.
I don't think that a person with a 7000 characters long cflags string can help to degub anything, at all.
About the poll, you all forgot an option:
[X] I don't relly on Reiser4 at all, so I don't want it into the stable sources.
As stated above by anyone, I think that a serious tester can patch the kernel with his/her hands. There is no need to include such stuff in a stable branch of the kernel. In fact, I am of the opinion that all the so called "experimental" patches should be taken off the kernel. Of course, im not so qualified as Torvalds to talk about that, so, if they are there and reiser4 is not maight there be a reason, or maybe he is working in some another important things and just dont have the time to look and test the "amazing" new reiser4 releases. It is all about priorities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
playfool
l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Ã
rhus, Denmark
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Putting my money where my mouth is, I tried a full Gentoo install on Reiser4 using Tiger' Nitro-sources as the driving engine since they seem popular amongst the.. debuggers of Reiser4. And I must say it wasn't a pretty experience, even with sane cflags.
Reiser4 showed a tendency to lock the system up under very specific and repeatable conditions, the latency seemed horrible and worst of all it seemed to cause slowdowns in many operations such as installing gst plugins.
Now the good bits, every time Reiser4 caused a crash the partitions recovered beautifully not a scratch on my data and the performance on small files is blazing fast as far as unscientify meassurements go (I stopwatched unpacking the kernel sources on my ext3 dir_index enabled partition prior to installing Gentoo and Reiser4 was indeed faster).
I'm not encouraged by this going into the kernel, I forsee a lot of problems, but in the same sense testing it for stability on -mm based kernels seems silly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aonoa
Guru
Joined: 23 May 2002
Posts: 589
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Personally, I'm just patching a vanilla kernel. I tried the mm-sources, but that was highly unstable indeed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jake
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1132
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| playfool wrote: | | Reiser4 showed a tendency to lock the system up under very specific and repeatable conditions, the latency seemed horrible and worst of all it seemed to cause slowdowns in many operations such as installing gst plugins. |
At least if it's under "very specific and repeatable conditions" you can file helpful bug reports. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
playfool
l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Ã
rhus, Denmark
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 10, 2005 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jake wrote: | | playfool wrote: | | Reiser4 showed a tendency to lock the system up under very specific and repeatable conditions, the latency seemed horrible and worst of all it seemed to cause slowdowns in many operations such as installing gst plugins. |
At least if it's under "very specific and repeatable conditions" you can file helpful bug reports. |
I'm currently trying to get the bug verified on another machine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
superstoned
Guru
Joined: 17 Dec 2004
Posts: 432
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| playfool wrote: | | Jake wrote: | | playfool wrote: | | Reiser4 showed a tendency to lock the system up under very specific and repeatable conditions, the latency seemed horrible and worst of all it seemed to cause slowdowns in many operations such as installing gst plugins. |
At least if it's under "very specific and repeatable conditions" you can file helpful bug reports. |
I'm currently trying to get the bug verified on another machine. |
i was put of by these slowdowns/lockups... would be great if they find and fix them.
@6thpink
i agree a serious bugtester should test on a stable system, not a ~* and full series of cflags. many ricers are ignored when filling bugs, and i understand that. but anyone who uses -nitro or -ck, or reiser4 is not a ricer, as some seem to think... i don't have many packages ummasked (mostly KDE for kde svn), have only -O2, -mmarch and -fvisibility in my cflags, and use and test -ck kernels (and the official -rc's) when i have time. ricer? why? i try to find and pin down bugs, and i like to do that. that's about it... i don't want an uberl33t system or whatever...
and most ricers seem to come back from their 'puberty' soon enough, as they also want a stable system. most only experiment with a few things, like gcc4. and not all, but many you might consider 'ricer' DO find and report bugs that are fixed, i'm sure about that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i92guboj
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10315
Location: Córdoba (Spain)
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 11, 2005 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Im sure about that, im not trying to put a label in the face of everyone who uses reiser4 or ck or gcc4. But, im also sure that, anyone who wants reiser4 into gentoo-sources or vanilla, is, for sure, a racer.
If you decide to patch your kernel, its ok. If you use a patched branch like ck or whatever, its ok. As I stated so many times, everyone if free to do what s/he wants to do. But if you want to put stuff like reiser4 into a stable branch of the kernel, then you are a racer. That will only make flee more newcomer to linux after a few days.
I remember when I came to linux (and when I was not so new)... Those days I thought, as most newbies did and still do, that the latest=the better, so, latest kernel=better kernel, latest fs=better fs. A newbye does not care if a fs is experimental or whatever. When s/he reads "experimental" may think that is a bit unstable, but will never think that his/her system is going to corrupt data and of freeze horribly. That, altogether with a missconfigured system, and summing that the newcomer does not have a clue on how to start fixing things (and, much less, how to report a bug efficiently) only scare newcomers, which, of course, after a couple of days of headache, in most cases, go away and take again their windoze cdrom.
To put experimental stuff in something that is supposed to be stable is a ricer's thought. Period.
If you want to race, buy a 1500 c.c. motorbike, a formula 1 car or an F17 and go to an adequate place. But, please, dont beg motorbike manufacturers to put a top high speed motor into every motorbike, so ricers can drive on the streets. I think it is a very reasonable thought |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mr2600
n00b
Joined: 22 Feb 2004
Posts: 54
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leaving out reiser4 is a good thing. I still remember the old days of reiserfs and the constant instability issues and arguments. And personally to me, they have a long way to proving they can make a stable filesystem. I once lost data due to the idiotic "single super block" design... I don't give a holler if its faster from whatever benchmark. Ext2/3 w-o-r-k-s. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jake
Veteran
Joined: 31 Jul 2003
Posts: 1132
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mr2600 wrote: | | Leaving out reiser4 is a good thing. I still remember the old days of reiserfs and the constant instability issues and arguments. And personally to me, they have a long way to proving they can make a stable filesystem. I once lost data due to the idiotic "single super block" design... I don't give a holler if its faster from whatever benchmark. Ext2/3 w-o-r-k-s. |
Before Namesys started making the changes required to get into vanilla, reiser4 was significantly more reliable than early reiserfs releases. After fixing a few bugs, it'll be at that state again. I don't know all the technical details, but I do know of a few cases where Namesys learned from their mistakes. This time around they built a good fsck instead of hacking one together as an afterthought. They have the framework in place to extend the filesystem and handle whatever metadata future users might want, whereas reiserfs had to be hacked to support extended attributes and ACLs. The reiserfs data recovery problems caused by loopback filesystems and dd images are also fixed in reiser4.
And if we want to throw out anecdotal evidence, I almost lost my /home a few times to an XFS superblock problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rzZzn
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 96
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 12, 2005 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It would be great to have it in the gentoo-(dev)-sources kernel
Used it over a year with no troubles |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PaveQ
Apprentice
Joined: 11 Feb 2005
Posts: 225
Location: Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would like to have reiserfs4 in gentoo-sources too.  Maybe I could try it out for /usr/portage for example.
But NO, I would have to try mm-sources or other unstable kernels, and that is not what I want. Why can't reiserfs4 be in gentoo-sources? I don't see any harm if it would be off by default and marked as HIGHLY UNSTABLE and NOT SUPPORTED.
Why?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
i92guboj
Bodhisattva
Joined: 30 Nov 2004
Posts: 10315
Location: Córdoba (Spain)
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PaveQ wrote: |
But NO, I would have to try mm-sources or other unstable kernels, and that is not what I want.
|
Let's analize this a bit. Do you know why gentoo-sources and vanilla-sources are stable??? Precisely because they don't ship such crappy and unstable code like the reiser4 one. What would be the difference between mm or whatever other source and gentoo-sources then?
If you want reiser4 in your stable vanilla or gentoo-sources then patch it. It is as easy as "cat <patchfile> | patch -p1". If you don't have the knowledge to simply patch the thing I advice you not to use reiser4. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
playfool
l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2004
Posts: 688
Location: Ã
rhus, Denmark
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PaveQ wrote: | I would like to have reiserfs4 in gentoo-sources too. Maybe I could try it out for /usr/portage for example.
But NO, I would have to try mm-sources or other unstable kernels, and that is not what I want. Why can't reiserfs4 be in gentoo-sources? I don't see any harm if it would be off by default and marked as HIGHLY UNSTABLE and NOT SUPPORTED.
Why? |
Why don't you try and read my previous post on the cost of keeping a delta with upstream - and Reiser4 having tried the latest snapshot is far from in a usable state for every day users like yourself - if you really want to try it, you should be skilled enough to at least patch it in yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
electrofreak
l33t
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 713
Location: Ohio, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 14, 2005 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
does it work on amd64 as of yet?
While I would like to use reiser4 for experimenting, I don't really want to use it on any sort of relied on system.
_________________
Desktop: ABit AN8, Athlon64 X2 4400+ 939 2.75GHz, 2x1GB Corsair XMS DDR400, 2x160GB SATA RAID-0, 2x20"W, Vista Ultimate x64
Laptop: 15.4" MacBook Pro 2.4Ghz, 2x1GB RAM, 160GB, Mac OS X 10.5.1
Server: PIII 550Mhz, 3x128MB RAM, 160GB, Ubuntu Server 7.10
Last edited by electrofreak on Thu Oct 27, 2005 11:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Gentoo Chat
