From owner-freebsd-questions Tue Aug 27 09:25:28 1996 Return-Path: owner-questions Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA13382 for questions-outgoing; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:25:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from who.cdrom.com (who.cdrom.com [204.216.27.3]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA13361; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:25:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (phaeton.Artisoft.COM [198.17.250.211]) by who.cdrom.com (8.7.5/8.6.11) with SMTP id JAA00139 ; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:25:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from terry@localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id JAA24806; Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:12:58 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199608271612.JAA24806@phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: s5 filesys implementation? To: amora@obelix.cica.es (Jesus A. Mora Marin) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:12:58 -0700 (MST) Cc: fs@freebsd.org, questions@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <199608270626.IAA08884@obelix.cica.es> from "Jesus A. Mora Marin" at Aug 27, 96 08:26:55 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > I am planning to implement support for s5 filesys, since I have a > particular interest in this subject. But I'd hate to do an unnecessary > work, so PLEASE let me know if any fellow is working already on this > stuff, or if this has been done, in fact. I am very out of date: the > last version I have is 2.2-960326SNAP -and waiting eagerly for the > 2.1.5 CD-ROM!-, and there was no support for this oldie. TIA. This is onmy list of "to do" items. I was an engineer for Novell/USG (USL) who worked on, among other things, kernel FS code. The recent SCO offer (and the supposedly yet-to-come offer from them on UnixWare) makes this a lot easier. I have been waiting on the devfs so that I can code physical-to-logical device translation drivers for SVR4/SCO partitioning and disklabelling and treat the things as raw devices; this support, at least, is now immanent. If you are planning on working on FS code in the very near future, then I'd say go ahead. Otherwise, I hope the lanscape will be changing pretty radically pretty soon -- if you have done enough FS work that you can abstract framework components from implementation, then you should be pretty safe for any long term projects that you want to pursue. You may want to consider holding off until the Lite2 integration has been completed; since it changes some of the architecture. I don't think it;s safe to assume that the changes from that direction are done either. Your best bet would be to get in contact with David Greenman or John Dyson, since they make architectural decisions, and the FS is one place that will be hit (one way or the other) by almost all architectural changes. Regards, Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.