lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: fs/adfs - keep or kill it?
From
Date
On 04/04/2019 11:35, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Recently, a couple of issues have been identified in fs/adfs:
>
> 1. Filename truncation may not work as it should, and Linus has
> apparently expressed a desire to kill this off.
>
> 2. Scanning the ADFS map for disc object fragments may mistakenly
> find free space fragments in addition to real disc object fragments,
> leading to chunks of free space appearing in files or directories.
>
> No one has reported any issues with the filesystem module, so the
> question has to be asked whether there are any users of this code?
>
> I'm aware that there were some users about ten or more years ago. I've
> only touched it when problems have been reported to me that needed me
> to investigate something, otherwise I haven't used it myself - so the
> code largely just sits there, mostly untouched except for the odd
> cross-filesystem patch.
>
> The last "feature" patch was in 2011 by Stuart Swales (copied) adding
> the filetype suffix to filenames.
>
> That leads on to the question about whether this should be fixed in
> mainline or whether we should put the code out of its misery and remove
> it from the kernel.
>
> Fixing both issues is fairly trivial, and I already have some fixes
> available, along with some improvements to the rest of the code.
> However, I see little point in pushing that upstream if the code is
> not being used.
>
> Searching the web, there does seem to be some interest on some forums,
> but that dates from about three years ago, but it also seems that more
> functional solutions (using fuse, with different format support) are
> available.
>
> Posting to Linux lists probably isn't the best way to find out whether
> there are users of this, so if there are people involved in the Acorn
> communities, please pass this on to more appropriate forums, thanks.
> Please ensure that replies reach me as I don't monitor random web
> forums for example (a reply on a web forum that I don't see is not
> helpful.)
>
> If I hear nothing positive towards keeping it, then I'll schedule
> fs/adfs for deletion, probably for 5.3.
>
> Thanks.
>

Thanks Russell

Have posted on the RISC OS Open site. I imagine some people will
complain just because they can. Can't see a need for it in new kernels
myself; people can always use old systems if they need to get data off
old ADFS IDE drives like I had to.

Regards,

Stuart
--
Stuart Swales

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-04 22:45    [W:0.044 / U:5.208 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site