ufs and ext
victorvittorivonwiktow at interfree.it
Fri Apr 25 15:45:22 PDT 2003
On Friday 25 April 2003 21:24, you wrote:
> ".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
It's horrible, we could fear we have no Gods any more... I'll never move from
ufs or from an hypothetical future 'son'. I have been really tried by
More information about the freebsd-advocacy