Date: Tue, 30 Mar 1999 17:00:02 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert) Cc: dyson@iquest.net, hamellr@dsinw.com, unknown@riverstyx.net, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD: The Storage Wars Message-ID: <199903302200.RAA16694@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <199903301823.LAA14513@usr06.primenet.com> from Terry Lambert at "Mar 30, 99 06:23:05 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Linux-Alpha doesn't have the 2 gig problem, and the 2.2 series does have > > > > patches available to go past the 2 gig limit. > > > > > > Which is why I personally don't like Linux. It seems that you're > > > always loading patches to fix little problems. :) Granted FreeBSD has > > > patches too. But when was the last time you needed a patch? :) Anyways, > > > isn't the Linux patch still limited to 8 gigs or so? > > > > IMO, it is *silly* that Linux doesn't support large files correctly. If > > it doesn't support large files on an X86, then it doesn't support large > > files. There was alot of pressure from the user and developer base when > > FreeBSD didn't properly support large files, and I am surprised that > > either the Linux base hasn't pressured for proper support for large files, > > or the Linux developers can't figure out how to do it. (I sure hope that > > it isn't arrogance on their part that it isn't "needed.") > > Well, as long as we are beating dead horses here... > > IMO, it is *silly* that FreeBSD coopted the fields in FFS that were > reserved for dealing with the Y2038 "bug", which technically didn't > exist in BSD 4.4 until these fields were coopted. > > But then, who am I to look 39 years into the future, instead of only > 6 months ahead, like everyone else. > Since the *fix* wasn't implemented, then the fix wasn't broken. Nothing additional was broken, and a better fix will eventually be created (e.g. changed inode structure for ACL support?) If you think that the ODS needs to be fixed, then fix it!!! :-). If it ends up being a solution rather than a hack, then it might just be adopted. If the "fix" ends up requiring lots of support from others, then the chance of the "idea" being adopted is lessened. But, please don't proclaim an idea as an implementation, and don't proclaim a piece of hackery as a "solution." I understand your frustration, but because YOUR projects don't get the highest priority doesn't mean that you are being ignored. It seems odd to me that some people think that others should support their works. John To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903302200.RAA16694>