Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 20:06:13 -0500 From: "Chris Csanady" <ccsanady@friley216.res.iastate.edu> To: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: VPS mailing list, BSD interest? Message-ID: <199610020106.UAA05994@friley216.res.iastate.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue, 01 Oct 1996 12:01:06 -0700. <199610011901.MAA02235@phaeton.artisoft.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> NTFS also uses b-trees. Actually it uses a linear directory structure for >> small directories and b-trees for larger directories. This optimization >> reminds me of the direct inode/indirect inode scheme used in FFS. > >NTFS would be a better choice, since JFS is pretty much IBM specific. >The only reason I pursued JFS at all was for cross developement in >my PPC porting environment. My developement is hosted under AIX. >Biunary compatability issues were a secondary consideration (after >making the thing boot). One of my big blocks has been replacing the >IBM boot code with freely distributable boot code; I don't have a >decent PPC disassembler, and Arrow Electronics has failed to send >the PPCBug documentation to the right address or via the right shipper >to the tune of multiple hundreds of dollars. This is made worse by >the fact that PPCBug is "going away", to be replaced by OpenBoot. > >All in all, for compatability, an NTFS would be a better choice, >since FreeBSD is currently very Intel specific anyway. I think I'd rather we went with JFS rather than NTFS, just on general principle. :) Or something else entirely perhaps. I was just thinking that it might be worth it considering that its partially done.. and perhaps improving upon it.. Chris Csanady > > > Terry Lambert > terry@lambert.org >--- >Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present >or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610020106.UAA05994>