[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: JFFS patch
I would be screaming a lot if we were not moving to JFFS2 ourselves.
However this will take us a few months to accomplish. If there is any
interest in JFFS and if someone is kind enough to point out the work TBD, I
will take a shot.
At 12:48 PM 6/24/03 +0200, Mikael Starvik wrote:
>Even at Axis (the original copyright holder of JFFS1) we are now using
>JFFS2. I'll check if someone inhouse is interrested in keeping JFFS1
>PS. I tested JFFS1 in 2.5 a while ago and it seamed to kind of work after
>one small patch. But I guess that there is much more to be done to make
>it reliable. DS
>From: firstname.lastname@example.org">mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 12:42 PM
>To: Alexander Viro
>Cc: Allen Curtis; Infradead Org; firstname.lastname@example.org
>Subject: Re: JFFS patch
>On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 11:35, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > It would be nice. There are several ugly craps in there and I'd
> > rather see it gone than try and fix them...
>Me too -- I started cleaning up at one point and the result was JFFS2 :)
>So unless I hear anguished screams from a huge user base who are using it
>and not JFFS2 for reasons which they haven't yet reported as JFFS2 bugs, and
>someone also steps forward to clean it up for 2.6, I'll submit a patch to
>Linus to remove it in a couple of weeks time.
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in the
>body of a message to email@example.com
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe jffs-dev" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org