On Thu, Dec 11, 2003 at 10:57:25PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > I am writing to -devel and not to -boot as I think this should be > visible for most developers, as it can have a huge impact in our > systems.
> I was reading [1] today that XFS is entering the 2.4 kernel tree - > Being we still reasonably far from having Sarge releasable, what would > you think on adding XFS support in our debian-installer? There are not > many relevant (although they might be quite complicated) bugs in > either xfs-progs or kernel-patch-xfs, and they will surely get > attention from upstrean with this announcement... > What do you think about this? I have never used XFS for my machines, > but have heard quite a lot of good comments about it, and would like > to see it available from the official d-i setup. I don't think that XFS support in the mainline d-i images should either precede our kernel maintainers' adoption of the newest kernel sources as a base, or force the issue of upgrading. We use XFS extensively at work, and while it has many nice features, I think some time is needed before we can say the integration into 2.4 has been successful. I'm actually quite surprised to hear the patch no longer touched the VFS by the time it was integrated; there were still quite a few things outside of fs/xfs being changed by the kernel patch last I looked. Either they've done an excellent job of merging the rest of these other changes already, or there are as-yet-unapplied patches that some of us might miss. ;) I'm really quite close on the ITP for the xfs-enabled kernel. I was about ready to upload (just needed a little more testing) before the compromise happened; now I've been trying to decide whether to wait for a brk-patched kernel tree in unstable before uploading, or to just upload and fix it later. Either way, I hope that we'll see some form of "official" support for XFS in sarge, even if it's not part of the default install images. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
pgpofkUSRH46y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
