"I have had to apply the reiser4 patches from -mm kernels to vanilla based patchset for over a year now. Reiser4 works fine, what will it take to get it included in vanilla?" began a brief thread on the Linux Kernel mailing list. Theodore Ts'o offered several links detailing the reamining issues with Reiser4, then suggested, "people who really like reiser4 might want to take a look at btrfs; it has a number of the same design ideas that reiser3/4 had --- except (a) the filesystem format has support for some advanced features that are designed to leapfrog ZFS, (b) the maintainer is not a crazy man and works well with other LKML developers (free hint: if your code needs to be reviewed to get in, and reviewers are scarce; don't insult and abuse the volunteer reviewers as Hans did --- Not a good plan!)."
Edward Shishkin noted that Reiser4 development continues, "I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the mentioned complaints." He added, "This document [defines] plugins [and] primitives (like conversion of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and describes all reiser4 interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc."
Hans Reiser, the original developer of the Reiser4 filesystem, was convicted of first degree murder on April 28'th, 2008. The latest Reiser4 patches currently live on kernel.org, as do the necessary support programs.
From: Ryan Hope <rmh3093@...> Subject: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 9:49 am 2008 Why is reiser4 still not in a vanilla kernel for testing. I have had to apply the reiser4 patches from -mm kernels to vanilla based patchset for over a year now. Reiser4 works fine, what will it take to get it included in vanilla? Here is a patch to add reiser4 to 2.6.27-rc1: http://zen-sources.org/files/reiser4-for-2.6.27-rc1.patch -Ryan --
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 12:25 pm 2008 On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 09:49:55AM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: > Why is reiser4 still not in a vanilla kernel for testing. I have had > to apply the reiser4 patches from -mm kernels to vanilla based > patchset for over a year now. Reiser4 works fine, what will it take to > get it included in vanilla? Here is a patch to add reiser4 to > 2.6.27-rc1: > > http://zen-sources.org/files/reiser4-for-2.6.27-rc1.patch The reasons laid out in these web pages haven't changed. http://kernelnewbies.org/WhyReiser4IsNotIn http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/28/180 http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/engine?do=post_view_flat;post=668645;page=1;sb=p... Now that Hans is out of the picture, and Namesys seems to have collapsed, maybe someone can yank out the plugin architecture that Linus and others have objected to, which as near as I could tell was part of the Namesys's somewhat dodgy business plan of creating and selling (possibly proprietary; not sure what license they were going to be under) plugin modules for Reiser4 to make money. The other issue that was raised during the review were some locking issues raised by Al Viro, if memory serves correctly. I'm not sure if they were ever fixed; at least initially they were brushed aside by Hans. In the meantime, people who really like reiser4 might want to take a look at btrfs; it has a number of the same design ideas that reiser3/4 had --- except (a) the filesystem format has support for some advanced features that are designed to leapfrog ZFS, (b) the maintainer is not a crazy man and works well with other LKML developers (free hint: if your code needs to be reviewed to get in, and reviewers are scarce; don't insult and abuse the volunteer reviewers as Hans did --- Not a good plan!). - Ted --
From: Ryan Hope <rmh3093@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 12:34 pm 2008 Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might have to try this... I am not impressed with btrfs yet. -Ryan On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 12:25 PM, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 09:49:55AM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >> Why is reiser4 still not in a vanilla kernel for testing. I have had >> to apply the reiser4 patches from -mm kernels to vanilla based >> patchset for over a year now. Reiser4 works fine, what will it take to >> get it included in vanilla? Here is a patch to add reiser4 to >> 2.6.27-rc1: >> >> http://zen-sources.org/files/reiser4-for-2.6.27-rc1.patch > > The reasons laid out in these web pages haven't changed. > > http://kernelnewbies.org/WhyReiser4IsNotIn > http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/28/180 > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/engine?do=post_view_flat;post=668645;page=1;sb=p... > > Now that Hans is out of the picture, and Namesys seems to have > collapsed, maybe someone can yank out the plugin architecture that > Linus and others have objected to, which as near as I could tell was > part of the Namesys's somewhat dodgy business plan of creating and > selling (possibly proprietary; not sure what license they were going > to be under) plugin modules for Reiser4 to make money. The other > issue that was raised during the review were some locking issues > raised by Al Viro, if memory serves correctly. I'm not sure if they > were ever fixed; at least initially they were brushed aside by Hans. > > In the meantime, people who really like reiser4 might want to take a > look at btrfs; it has a number of the same design ideas that reiser3/4 > had --- except (a) the filesystem format has support for some advanced > features that are designed to leapfrog ZFS, (b) the maintainer is not > a crazy man and works well with other LKML developers (free hint: if > your code needs to be reviewed to get in, and reviewers are scarce; > don't insult and abuse the volunteer reviewers as Hans did --- Not a > good plan!). > > - Ted > --
From: Theodore Tso <tytso@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 12:45 pm 2008 On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: > Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might > have to try this... I am not impressed with btrfs yet. Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, and make sure those comments have been addressed. Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers like Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. Best regards, - Ted --
From: Ric Wheeler <ricwheeler@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 2:15 pm 2008 Theodore Tso wrote: > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: > >> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >> have to try this... I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >> > > Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other > people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might > try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate > with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be > to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, > and make sure those comments have been addressed. > > Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and > insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers like > Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems > as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. > > Best regards, > > - Ted > My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively working on reiser4.... ric --
From: Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 1, 6:40 pm 2008 Ric Wheeler wrote: > Theodore Tso wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >> Hi, I am here :) Join our mailing list: http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>> have to try this... Please, don't try to do this. I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the mentioned complaints. >>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>> >> >> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >> >> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. Thanks, Edward. >> like >> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >> >> Best regards, >> >> - Ted >> > > My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively > working on reiser4.... > > ric > > --
From: Ryan Hope <rmh3093@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 2, 11:47 am 2008 Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" actually is and how it supposed to help? -Ryan On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: > Ric Wheeler wrote: >> Theodore Tso wrote: >>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>> > > Hi, I am here :) > Join our mailing list: > > http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel > http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 > > There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. > >>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>> have to try this... > > Please, don't try to do this. > > I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready > approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the > mentioned complaints. > >>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>> >>> >>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>> >>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers > > Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) > We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. > > Thanks, > Edward. > >>> like >>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> - Ted >>> >> >> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >> working on reiser4.... >> >> ric >> >> > > > --
From: Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 2, 6:56 pm 2008 Ryan Hope wrote: > Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" > actually is and how it supposed to help? > -Ryan > > This document is to define plugins, etc primitives (like conversion of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and to describe all reiser4 interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc. (many items are devoted to interaction between VFS and reiser4). I am sorry, but these concepts (which are very central) have not been worked out carefully enough at the moment of this 3-year-old review: http://kerneltrap.org/node/5330 Edward. > On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin > <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ric Wheeler wrote: >> >>> Theodore Tso wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>>> >>>> >> Hi, I am here :) >> Join our mailing list: >> >> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel >> http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 >> >> There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >> >> >>>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>>> have to try this... >>>>> >> Please, don't try to do this. >> >> I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready >> approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the >> mentioned complaints. >> >> >>>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>>> >>>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers >>>> >> Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) >> We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. >> >> Thanks, >> Edward. >> >> >>>> like >>>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> - Ted >>>> >>>> >>> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >>> working on reiser4.... >>> >>> ric >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > --
From: Ryan Hope <rmh3093@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 2, 7:18 pm 2008 So the purpose of that "plugins" document is just to "defend" the present state of the reiser4 code? On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: > Ryan Hope wrote: >> Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" >> actually is and how it supposed to help? >> -Ryan >> >> > > This document is to define plugins, etc primitives (like conversion > of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and to describe all reiser4 > interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not > duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc. (many items > are devoted to interaction between VFS and reiser4). > I am sorry, but these concepts (which are very central) have not been > worked out carefully enough at the moment of this 3-year-old review: > http://kerneltrap.org/node/5330 > > Edward. > >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin >> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Ric Wheeler wrote: >>> >>>> Theodore Tso wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>> Hi, I am here :) >>> Join our mailing list: >>> >>> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel >>> http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 >>> >>> There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >>> >>> >>>>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>>>> have to try this... >>>>>> >>> Please, don't try to do this. >>> >>> I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready >>> approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the >>> mentioned complaints. >>> >>> >>>>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>>>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>>>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>>>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>>>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>>>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>>>> >>>>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>>>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers >>>>> >>> Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) >>> We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Edward. >>> >>> >>>>> like >>>>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>>>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> >>>>> - Ted >>>>> >>>>> >>>> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >>>> working on reiser4.... >>>> >>>> ric >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > --
From: Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 4, 7:11 am 2008 Ryan Hope wrote: > So the purpose of that "plugins" document is just to "defend" the > present state of the reiser4 code? > Yes. In particular. Plugins stuff is a way of data storage optimization and its removing definitely would be a mistake. What can arise here again is complaints about "layering violation". However, addressing them doesn't necessarily mean removing the whole plugin stuff. I hope that this document will help such discussions to be more constructive. Thanks, Edward. > On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Edward Shishkin > <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ryan Hope wrote: >> >>> Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" >>> actually is and how it supposed to help? >>> -Ryan >>> >>> >>> >> This document is to define plugins, etc primitives (like conversion >> of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and to describe all reiser4 >> interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not >> duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc. (many items >> are devoted to interaction between VFS and reiser4). >> I am sorry, but these concepts (which are very central) have not been >> worked out carefully enough at the moment of this 3-year-old review: >> http://kerneltrap.org/node/5330 >> >> Edward. >> >> >>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin >>> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Ric Wheeler wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Theodore Tso wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> Hi, I am here :) >>>> Join our mailing list: >>>> >>>> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel >>>> http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 >>>> >>>> There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>>>>> have to try this... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> Please, don't try to do this. >>>> >>>> I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready >>>> approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the >>>> mentioned complaints. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>>>>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>>>>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>>>>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>>>>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>>>>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>>>>> >>>>>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>>>>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) >>>> We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Edward. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> like >>>>>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>>>>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>> >>>>>> - Ted >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >>>>> working on reiser4.... >>>>> >>>>> ric >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > --
From: Dushan Tcholich <dusanc@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 4, 7:18 am 2008 Well as I remember akpm and hch both said that these "plugins" are just a way of modular programing, and not layering violation, but I just can't find those mails now, there were a lot of them. On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Edward Shishkin <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: > Ryan Hope wrote: >> So the purpose of that "plugins" document is just to "defend" the >> present state of the reiser4 code? >> > > Yes. In particular. > > Plugins stuff is a way of data storage optimization and its > removing definitely would be a mistake. What can arise here > again is complaints about "layering violation". However, > addressing them doesn't necessarily mean removing the whole > plugin stuff. I hope that this document will help such discussions > to be more constructive. > > Thanks, > Edward. > >> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Edward Shishkin >> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Ryan Hope wrote: >>> >>>> Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" >>>> actually is and how it supposed to help? >>>> -Ryan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> This document is to define plugins, etc primitives (like conversion >>> of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and to describe all reiser4 >>> interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not >>> duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc. (many items >>> are devoted to interaction between VFS and reiser4). >>> I am sorry, but these concepts (which are very central) have not been >>> worked out carefully enough at the moment of this 3-year-old review: >>> http://kerneltrap.org/node/5330 >>> >>> Edward. >>> >>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin >>>> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Ric Wheeler wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Theodore Tso wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Hi, I am here :) >>>>> Join our mailing list: >>>>> >>>>> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel >>>>> http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 >>>>> >>>>> There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>>>>>> have to try this... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>> Please, don't try to do this. >>>>> >>>>> I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready >>>>> approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the >>>>> mentioned complaints. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>>>>>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>>>>>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>>>>>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>>>>>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>>>>>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>>>>>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) >>>>> We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Edward. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> like >>>>>>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>>>>>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Ted >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >>>>>> working on reiser4.... >>>>>> >>>>>> ric >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > --
From: Dushan Tcholich <dusanc@...> Subject: Re: reiser4 for 2.6.27-rc1 Date: Aug 4, 7:34 am 2008 Found it :) akpm: "The plugins appear to be wildly misnamed - they're just an internal abstraction layer which permits later feature additions to be added in a clean and safe manner. Certainly not worth all this fuss." http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=115442117418736&w=2 hch: "That because the real plugins are long gone. It's just that neither the complainers nor the fanboys in this thread ever read the code or generally had any clue of their own." http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=115443267908751&w=2 Hope this is of some help. Bye Dushan On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Dushan Tcholich <dusanc@gmail.com> wrote: > Well as I remember akpm and hch both said that these "plugins" are > just a way of modular programing, and not layering violation, but I > just can't find those mails now, there were a lot of them. > > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Edward Shishkin > <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >> Ryan Hope wrote: >>> So the purpose of that "plugins" document is just to "defend" the >>> present state of the reiser4 code? >>> >> >> Yes. In particular. >> >> Plugins stuff is a way of data storage optimization and its >> removing definitely would be a mistake. What can arise here >> again is complaints about "layering violation". However, >> addressing them doesn't necessarily mean removing the whole >> plugin stuff. I hope that this document will help such discussions >> to be more constructive. >> >> Thanks, >> Edward. >> >>> On Sat, Aug 2, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Edward Shishkin >>> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Ryan Hope wrote: >>>> >>>>> Can you explain a little more what this "plugin design documentation" >>>>> actually is and how it supposed to help? >>>>> -Ryan >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> This document is to define plugins, etc primitives (like conversion >>>> of run-time objects) used in reiser4, and to describe all reiser4 >>>> interfaces, so that it will be clear that VFS functionality is not >>>> duplicated, there are not VFS layers inside reiser4, etc. (many items >>>> are devoted to interaction between VFS and reiser4). >>>> I am sorry, but these concepts (which are very central) have not been >>>> worked out carefully enough at the moment of this 3-year-old review: >>>> http://kerneltrap.org/node/5330 >>>> >>>> Edward. >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 6:40 PM, Edward Shishkin >>>>> <edward.shishkin@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Ric Wheeler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Theodore Tso wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:34:53PM -0400, Ryan Hope wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, I am here :) >>>>>> Join our mailing list: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#reiserfs-devel >>>>>> http://marc.info/?l=reiserfs-devel&r=1&w=2 >>>>>> >>>>>> There are many interesting tasks to resolve/investigate.. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hmmm, removing the plugin support might not be so hard.... I might >>>>>>>>> have to try this... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Please, don't try to do this. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am working on the plugin design document. It will be ready >>>>>> approximately in September. I believe that it'll address all the >>>>>> mentioned complaints. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I am not impressed with btrfs yet. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Well, if you're going to work on reiser4 (and I think there were other >>>>>>>> people who had also expressed interest/plans to work on it; you might >>>>>>>> try doing a search on the various mailing lists so you can coordinate >>>>>>>> with them and avoid duplicating work), my suggestion to you would be >>>>>>>> to find the comments that were made by the reviewers way back when, >>>>>>>> and make sure those comments have been addressed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then, re-requests a code review, and promise that you won't abuse, and >>>>>>>> insult the integrity and impugn the motivations of the reviewers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Well, Ted, I'll promise ;) >>>>>> We'll adhere strictly the propositional logic in the review thread.. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> Edward. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>> Hans did, and hopefully after they review the code, fix those problems >>>>>>>> as well. Then you can try resubmitting for inclusion. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best regards, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - Ted >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> My most up to date information is that Edward is still actively >>>>>>> working on reiser4.... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ric >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe reiserfs-devel" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > --
Erm...
What a KILLER IDEA! :-P
I'll be here all week.
Contribute from inside jail?
Can Hans contribute from inside jail?
As it is open source it
As it is open source it appears not to matter, had this been a commercial endeavor it was have died.
Send him a laptop
Hans Reiser has been charged for the murder of his wife and will be sentenced to 15 years in prison for second-degree murder.
The police have now found the body.
I am shocked, this is absolutely terrible. It saddens me deeply to hear this. This is a very unfortunate tragedy - not that his wife is dead, but that now perhaps he wont be able to develop Reiser4, the amazing file system. :(
Send Hans Raiser a laptop so that he can continue the development and keep on contributing to Linux.
A laptop in exchange for a full-time contributor servicing us for 15 years.
The RoI (return on investment) will be absolutely incredible.
Reiser4 is a next-generation state-of-the-art high-performance journaled killer file system sponsored by DARPA, it features block suballocation, allocate-on-flush, transactions, plugins, compression, encryption, etc. It is 10 to 15 times faster than its most serious competitor. Possibly the greatest file system ever.
"This is a very unfortunate
"This is a very unfortunate tragedy - not that his wife is dead, but that now perhaps he wont be able to develop Reiser4"
You seriously need to get a grip on reality, when the development of a filesystem is more important to you than a human life.
+100000
+100000
Irony?
The two of you don't have clue what that is, right?
I see irony is a new concept
I see irony is a new concept to you, keep practicing, you're almost there.
i think its you that needs a
i think its you that needs a grip on reality. the death of a stranger has almost no significance to his life (or yours or mine). a filesystem on the other hand, that could be used by millions (including you and me), would likely be pretty significant. in the end, i can imagine for most people the filesystem is more important than the strangers life.
reality is heartless, i know. i hope your are not genuinely surprised by this persons reaction though.
except that Hans R. had
except that Hans R. had nothing to do with the code writing or bug fixing. So he can not even contribute in any meaningfull manner.
And for the others - can you stop the bullshit? If not you should also never ever again eat. Refuse any help after serious injuries, never accept help when undercooled, never wear protective gear when sailing and don't use a couple of pharmaceutical products.
First fork and rename please
Having a "killer filesystem" is very bad marketing.
Disagree as much as you like, but that is the truth.
R4 is a good filesystem.
It's been around for years, it's actively maintained. The only real problem is as the thread states the plugin system, which needlessly complicates things.
Incidentally I tried migrating my package manager partition from reiser4 to btrfs a few weeks ago; in the middle of restoring the backup btrfs segfaulted and refused to budge...