Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 03:46:46 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: Nils Holland <nils@tisys.org> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.ORG>, "Gary W. Swearingen" <swear@blarg.net>, hiten@uk.FreeBSD.org, "Brandon D. Valentine" <bandix@looksharp.net>, Hiten Pandya <hitmaster2k@yahoo.com>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG, phk@FreeBSD.ORG, Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> Subject: Re: IBM's intentions with JFS (was: IBM suing (was: RMS Suing was [SUGGESTION] - JFS for FreeBSD)) Message-ID: <3C1DDB26.62969FFB@mindspring.com> References: <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <3C1875D6.5DE4F996@mindspring.com> <3C186381.6AB07090@yahoo.com> <20011214122837.O3448@monorchid.lemis.com> <3C19807D.C441F084@mindspring.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011214175450.02da2a90@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011215232233.00e74cc0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20011216221810.031b6820@localhost> <20011217163427.A2885@monorchid.lemis.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20011217001345.00e26280@localhost> <20011217111835.A43375@tisys.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Nils Holland wrote: > I don't think that GNU FPU is on by default in GENERIC, but I guess that > JFS might not be either. Therefore, theoretically, as the GNU FPU code has > not caused any problems, why should JFS code do? It is not required to simply boot the OS, the way that JFS would be, if the default were to install to JFS partitions. One major point to keep in mind is that most people do not change from the defaults, once installed (which is why most Windows users do not "also run" Linux, FreeBSD, etc.). For JFS to be useful, it would really need to be an installation option, and the inability to make it an installation option as a result iof the license is the problem at hand. The GNU FPU emulator is much less useful (and much less used) because of the usefully equivalent BSD version that is the default, and because of most modern hardware, wigth the exception of embedded systems, coming with FPU hardware already installed. Likewise, JFS, if UFS were still the default, would seee little deployment, in the same way that the GNU FPU emulation sees little deployment. > I thought that you were talking about making FreeBSD support the JFS > filesystem, and not making FreeBSD *depend* on JFS, so that JFS becomes the > main and only filesystem available. Consequently, I don't see any problems > here. See above. For it to be useful, it has to be easy to use as the default FS. The IBM people recognize this as well, as regards JFS usage in Linux (see the IBM white papers for reference). > *If* a possible JFS port would require us to license the whole kernel > under the GPL, then I guess the inclusion of the GNU FPU code already does > that now. It's not linked with the kernel by default. Therefor, it is mostly not used, unless the linking is done locally and with intent. By the same token, the JFS would/could not be used by default. Unlike the root FS type, however, you can recompile a kernel to use a different FPU emulator rather easily, and without impacting things like the on disk FS structure. For that reason, I believe that the JFS would find *much less* use, even, than the GNU FPU emulator. FWIW, -- Terry 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?3C1DDB26.62969FFB>