From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 7 17:40:58 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E70216A46E for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:40:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from outF.internet-mail-service.net (outF.internet-mail-service.net [216.240.47.229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366BF13C459 for ; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:40:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from mx0.idiom.com (HELO idiom.com) (216.240.32.160) by out.internet-mail-service.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:40:57 -0800 Received: from julian-mac.elischer.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by idiom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81591270FD; Thu, 7 Feb 2008 09:40:55 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <47AB42AB.6020107@elischer.org> Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:40:59 -0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Attilio Rao References: <3bbf2fe10802061700p253e68b8s704deb3e5e4ad086@mail.gmail.com> <47AAFDED.9030301@freebsd.org> <47AB05A1.7010803@freebsd.org> <3bbf2fe10802070613mf2bf3feg5dcb480501fcfbbc@mail.gmail.com> <20080207141820.GR99258@elvis.mu.org> <3bbf2fe10802070621h574f5d3kb4fbd86adbab11c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10802070621h574f5d3kb4fbd86adbab11c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Yar Tikhiy , Scot Hetzel , Andre Oppermann , Jeff Roberson , Alfred Perlstein , freebsd-fs@freebsd.org, Doug Barton , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC] Remove NTFS kernel support X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 17:40:58 -0000 Attilio Rao wrote: > 2008/2/7, Alfred Perlstein : >> * Attilio Rao [080207 06:13] wrote: >>> 2008/2/7, Andre Oppermann : >>>> Eric Anderson wrote: >>>>> I think Alfred's point is really interesting. How many people that >>>>> don't use it that say 'axe it' does it take to override 1 person saying >>>>> 'keep it!'? >>>> The real question is how many people does it take to say 'I'll maintain >>>> it'? Just one. Without it, it will only bitrot as evidenced by Attilios >>>> question. NTFS is currently broken, just not as obvious because WITNESS >>>> didn't track and enforce lockmgr locks. >>> Andre catched exactly my point. >>> The big problem is that we have a list of several unmaintained fs. >>> NTFS is in this list. The support is not reliable, it is only >>> available in read mode and eventually bugged. >>> I'm not sure I want to keep this if nobody wants to maintain it. >> All I'm saying is that I think this is a bit premature considering >> the users. Within less than 24hrs we've had a few users reporting >> in as users, I'm sure the fixes (now that we have some good assertions) >> are going to be trivial. >> >> Why not let it ferment/rot for a release cycle and then see what >> the story is? > > Obviously if we can fix it is better, but axing is an opportunity I > don't want to leave out and this is why I wanted to poll users about > this issue. Eventually, if an axing is decided, it won't happen in > short times but only once all situations for "migration" will be > probed and finished. I think axing it would be a mistake. > > Attilio > >