Date: Thu, 14 Oct 1999 13:15:25 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Kirk McKusick <mckusick@flamingo.McKusick.COM> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@whistle.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The eventual fate of BLOCK devices. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910141222290.32868-100000@alphplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <199910131738.KAA18428@flamingo.McKusick.COM>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Kirk McKusick wrote: > If no one on the list can think of any use, I doubt that there is one. I routinely use Linux fsck.ext2 and mkfs.ext2 to develop ext2fs under FreeBSD. These (at least the May 1997 versions) depend on the system for sub-block i/o's. savecore depended on the system for sub-block i/o's until recently. It needs to read the dumpmag word and related things, and doing its own blocking just for this is unnecessarily difficult. > Just because there might some day be a use is not enough reason to have > an interface. BSD has stayed lean and mean (relative to the commercial > Unix varients) by actively throwing out decrepit interfaces. If we revert FreeBSD hasn't been so successful in avoiding bloat. The text size of a (sub) minimal kernel with no options or devices has increased from 275K in FreeBSD-1.1.5 to 500K in FreeBSD-3.3 and 550K in FreeBSD-current. The size of sys/kern has increased from 822 blocks in FreeBSD-1.1.5 to 780 blocks in Lite2, 1719 blocks in FreeBSD-3.3 and 1812 blocks in FreeBSD-current. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9910141222290.32868-100000>