Paragon Looks To Mainline Their NTFS Read-Write Driver To The Mainline Linux Kernel

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • CommunityMember
    Senior Member
    • Oct 2019
    • 1375

    #11
    Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
    Why don't Linux kernel devs not use GitLab like normal people? Sending patches to mailing lists is stupid.
    Have you proposed your new workflow via LKML?

    Comment

    • noQaPLvxLF1c
      Junior Member
      • Aug 2020
      • 7

      #12
      Well, I think it's a positive that the primary concern with this is the form in which the patch was offered for review. And not necessarily on technical grounds yet. The developers of this NTFS rw-driver would just need to clean up the request for review and all would be good, I'd wager to guess.

      Mainline NTFS rw support in the kernel would be a very welcome thing indeed. I hope that it does not get shot down over the somewhat muddy 27k lines of "spam".

      Comment

      • polarathene
        Senior Member
        • Nov 2014
        • 1336

        #13
        Originally posted by cl333r View Post
        Like what? Last I heard Windows 10 is still on NTFS, or is it?
        If you're on Workstation/Enterprise editions of Windows, default is ReFS I think:

        Comment

        • oiaohm
          Senior Member
          • Mar 2017
          • 8443

          #14
          Originally posted by polarathene View Post
          If you're on Workstation/Enterprise editions of Windows, default is ReFS I think:


          That is a think. ReFS is not able to be bootable with windows. So Workstation/Enterprise editions windows is still installed on NTFS. Yes NTFS is still the default. If you read above ReFS is still missing lots of features. Yes ReFS missing features difference between XFS vs ZFS look like minor issues.

          Comment

          • cl333r
            Senior Member
            • Oct 2009
            • 2305

            #15
            Originally posted by oiaohm View Post



            That is a think. ReFS is not able to be bootable with windows. So Workstation/Enterprise editions windows is still installed on NTFS. Yes NTFS is still the default. If you read above ReFS is still missing lots of features. Yes ReFS missing features difference between XFS vs ZFS look like minor issues.
            Microsoft is a giant and they couldn't finish it, wow, now I'm thinking Btrfs takes so long not because it was badly mismanaged, or was it..?

            Comment

            • zxy_thf
              Senior Member
              • Mar 2012
              • 621

              #16
              Originally posted by polarathene View Post

              If you're on Workstation/Enterprise editions of Windows, default is ReFS I think:

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReFS
              Nope, you can't boot from ReFS so the system volume is still NTFS.

              Update:
              It seems a lot of neat features are missing in ReFS
              Last edited by zxy_thf; 15 August 2020, 10:51 PM.

              Comment

              • brad0
                Senior Member
                • May 2012
                • 1013

                #17
                Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                Why don't Linux kernel devs not use GitLab like normal people? Sending patches to mailing lists is stupid.
                Way too often people that use GitHub / GitLab do a poor job of maintaining projects. Sending patches like that is stupid.

                Comment

                • emblemparade
                  Senior Member
                  • Jan 2014
                  • 405

                  #18
                  There are a lot of companies, both big and small, who would love to see this mainlined. I imagine a bunch of people will be working (for pay) to review and get the code into a mergeable state.

                  This is very good news all in all.

                  Comment

                  • CommunityMember
                    Senior Member
                    • Oct 2019
                    • 1375

                    #19
                    Originally posted by noQaPLvxLF1c View Post
                    Well, I think it's a positive that the primary concern with this is the form in which the patch was offered for review. And not necessarily on technical grounds yet.
                    When the form itself make it difficult to review, it discourages getting to the technical review stage. And it would seem that someone did not even run checkpatch.pl against the code and address some of the low hanging fruit (although there are a number of false positives in that output due to the realities of NTFS names).

                    Comment

                    • microcode
                      Senior Member
                      • Mar 2013
                      • 2367

                      #20
                      Originally posted by Awesomeness View Post
                      Why don't Linux kernel devs not use GitLab like normal people? Sending patches to mailing lists is stupid.
                      I mean, a) why would they be normal? and b) mailing lists are a very efficient way to do this once you're set up for it. SourceHut is a brand new repo hosting service which basically runs on this process.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X