Paragon Looks To Upstream Their Microsoft exFAT Driver For The Linux Kernel

[abott]

You never know what kind of quirks or strange behavior could result from third-party implementations under very fringe or rare situations.

You also will never have a optimized driver without porting to the utilities you use. You always implement it on your own using your architecture. The reference isn't strictly the code, it's the format moreso.

[Nille_kungen]

There's also need for repair support for exfat for it to be fully supported.
I saw that exfat-utils v1.3.0 has an exfatfsck that can repair some errors.
What i mean is that it's more to a filesystem then read and write support.

[Space Heater]

I will strongly prefer the kernel developers to improve on Microsoft's driver than use other implementations.

Just because exFAT is Microsoft's filesystem and their code is the reference implementation of exFAT.

You never know what kind of quirks or strange behavior could result from third-party implementations under very fringe or rare situations.

The driver in staging is from Samsung not Microsoft, did you read the article?

[FireBurn]

Am I just jaded? It feels very much like this company realised they're not going to make any money from exFat any more so decided to realise their code. By upstreaming if, they don't have to support it any more.

[SpyroRyder]

Now if only theyd do tthe same for NTFS so we dont have that masive performace hit that is NTFS-3g

[polarathene]

Am I just jaded? It feels very much like this company realised they're not going to make any money from exFat any more so decided to realise their code. By upstreaming if, they don't have to support it any more.

Is it bad they want to upstream it though? If it's better quality, take it. They're willing to add write support on top as apparently their proprietary driver only provided read support?(that or I misunderstood the article)

[timofonic]

Is it bad they want to upstream it though? If it's better quality, take it. They're willing to add write support on top as apparently their proprietary driver only provided read support?(that or I misunderstood the article)

As usual, Phoronix articles leave a great deal to be desired.

Can someone research about this? What about contacting Paragon and Linux kernel developers?

[DanL]

By upstreaming if, they don't have to support it any more.

No, you can't just dump stuff into the kernel and forget about it, unless you find someone else with the time/inclination/skill to maintain it.

[Delgarde]

michealWhy is it I can call a person, concept, or thing a retarded fuckstick and that gets approved whereas something positive gets unapproved?

Well, it does make some sense that positive comments are more likely to get flagged as potential spam, since spammers generally don't describe their products as "a retarded fuckstick", however appropriate it might be.

[Delgarde]

Am I just jaded? It feels very much like this company realised they're not going to make any money from exFat any more so decided to realise their code. By upstreaming if, they don't have to support it any more.

Or a simpler answer — it's just a filesystem, and they were never going to make much money off it, so why bother trying to keep things proprietary? Release the code, encourage everyone to use it, and get a bit of good PR for relatively little cost.