On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:39:51 -0500
Thor Lancelot Simon <tls@rek.tjls.com> wrote:

> I once attempted to obtain and compile the version of the BSD-LFS
> code used to obtain the results in the last Seltzer et al. LFS
> paper.  I found the exercise rather frustrating.
Since I came to *BSD in 1997 (?) LFS has been in a "experimental, can /
will crash your system, will not work reliable, use with caution, ..."
state on any BSD. For me, LFS is a dead horse. Lets bury it instead
beating on it in the false hope to get it back to live. _Please_ stop
wasting time and energy on this dead animal.

I have to admit that I have nearly no knowledge on file system internas.
But to me it seems that LFS is based on principles and FS design
knowledge of at least 15, if not 20, years in age. There has happened a
lot in that time in this area: AdvFS, XFS, reiserfs, jfs, ... So there
are enough examples to learn from.

At home I use AdvFS on my Alphas running OSF/1 / DEC / Tru64 UNIX and
XFS on my SGIs. At work, where I have to fight with Linux/i386, I prefer
XFS. I would really like to see a FS with the capabilities of AdvFS on
NetBSD. AdvFS has _really_ advanced concepts and features compared with
any other FS knowen to me. At least somthing like XFS would be nice.
Unfortunately I don't have the knowledge to accomplish this non-trivial
task nor the time to acquire this knowledge.

Just my thoughts on the ever returning LFS topic...
--=20


tsch=FC=DF,
       Jochen

Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/