Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 1 Oct 1996 12:01:06 -0700 (MST)
From:      Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
To:        michaelh@cet.co.jp (Michael Hancock)
Cc:        ccsanady@friley216.res.iastate.edu, hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: VPS mailing list, BSD interest?
Message-ID:  <199610011901.MAA02235@phaeton.artisoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SV4.3.93.961001133845.22919B-100000@parkplace.cet.co.jp> from "Michael Hancock" at Oct 1, 96 01:45:04 pm

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.


					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?199610011901.MAA02235>