Re: [Pan-devel] The Blue Sky Becomes Clear - part 01: Basic Thoughts - revision 00

[Duncan]

On Thu 03 Apr 2003 22:44, Evan Martin posted as excerpted below:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2003 at 03:50:36PM -0700, Duncan wrote:
> > I'd argue that your statement about Linux is incorrect.  This isn't
> > MSWormOS.   We aren't stuck with some limited choice of proprietary fs
> > formats.  There are all sorts of fs formats to meet all sorts of
> > different needs.  In this case, ReiserFS is a perfect choice, since it
> > deals with small files, or "tails" of large files, by tucking them
> > directly into the fs structure, packing them together with the directory
> > meta-data.
>
> Requiring ReiserFS for reasonable not only limits Pan to non-Windows.
> It limits pan to Linux (unless my Google queries misled me).

I don't argue that such isn't the case.  In fact, I agree.  However, that 
isn't what I was taking issue with.  I was taking issue with the clearly 
untrue statement that "the directory is littered with hundreds or thousands 
of files with each burning a (typically) 4KB inode (for linux 
installations)."

IOW, had that "(for linux installations)" read "ext2/ext3 installations" 
instead, or had the statement simply read "several KB inodes" without 
specifying Linux, I would have agreed with it and been fine.  I just took 
exception to the implication that there wasn't a solution to this problem on 
Linux installations, when there is.

The same applies to the other replies..  I understand (and agree with) the 
objections of expecting everyone to create a ReiserFS partition to run PAN.  
That wasn't the point I was making, however (or anyway it wasn't the point I 
intended to make, tho I guess it did come out that way <g>).  What I was 
simply addressing was the above implication that Linux didn't have some 
decent solution for this problem -- it does.

-- 
Duncan
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
Benjamin Franklin