Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2003 15:24:09 -0700 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: ".VWV." <victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ufs and ext Message-ID: <3EA9B589.AAD7A527@mindspring.com> References: <200304250203.28738.victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
".VWV." wrote: > I have noticed both BSD and Linux pre-compiled kernels cannot mount read-write > the other filesystem. It's a shame that a newbie could think one is able to > read, the other one is able to write. We know ufs was born before ext. Some > Linux distributions has also adopted ReiserFS on Linux, that's really a > not-unix filesystem. Why at PASC nobody has declared what's the best > standard? Everyone has declared their own as being "the best standard", so no one interoperates. 8-). As to defaults, the issue is one of License conflicts. The GPL is poison-pilled against all other licenses, in clause 6. You can, of course, compile your own kernel with whatever code you want in it, in both Linux and BSD, so long as you do not distribute a binary that can't legally be licensed. If you go with the "least common denominator", e.g. FAT32, then both systems can mount the FS read/write, no problem, though that's probably not very satisfying to you. -- Terry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EA9B589.AAD7A527>