Kernel update / DragonFly_Stable tag reverted to September 13th

[Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai]

-On [20041008 13:52], Jeroen (koffieyahoo at xxxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
>I don't really know anything of the VFS code, but would it be easier to 
>leave the old VFS code alone and write the new VFS code as a sort of "shadow 
>system" which does not really give rise to disk operations, but just 
>compares its state with that of the old VFS system and panics (or does 
>something else noticeable) when it is inconsistent with the state of the old 
>VFS system? Afterwards when the new code is done you can rip out the old VFS 
>code in one blow.

I think going this way will lead to insanity.

I am slightly familiar with the VFS code and only because I was helping
Adrian Chadd at one point with the documentation of it.

Trying to have both the old and new next to eachother and doing comparisons
of the data will be a huge decrease in performance.

But that's a VFS newbie's take on it.

-- 
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(at)wxs.nl> / asmodai / kita no mono
Free Tibet! http://www.savetibet.org/ | http://ashemedai.deviantart.com/
http://www.tendra.org/   | http://www.in-nomine.org/
I never think of the future, it comes soon enough...