[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Reiser4-enabled Debian Unstable (Sid) netboot iso

On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 07:22:21 +0100
Cyril Brulebois <kibi@debian.org> wrote:

> Adam Wilson <moxalt@riseup.net> (2016-01-11):
> > This is somewhat off-topic, but why was ReiserFS support removed
> > from d-i? I am a big fan of Reiser3 personally, but I use XFS now.  
> In linux's changelog:
> | linux (3.10.1-1) unstable; urgency=low
> | […]
> |   * udeb: Remove obsolete and unsupported drivers and filesystems
> |     - Remove ppa from scsi-modules
> |     - Remove floppy-modules, irda-modules, parport-modules,
> plip-modules, |       qnx4-modules, reiserfs-modules, ufs-modules
> | […]
> |  -- Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>  Tue, 16 Jul 2013 02:06:53
> +0100
> It seems it was already being phased out in d-i a few years before
> that: https://www.debian.org/devel/debian-installer/News/2010/20101030

That is interesting. I distinctly remember the 'ReiserFS' filesystem
option being present in the Wheezy d-i. The description went something
like this: 'Journaling filesystem created by Hans Reiser' or something
along those lines. Your research has revealed otherwise- but I have my
suspicions. I'm sure I didn't make up that experience.

Perhaps I somehow inadvertently customised my copy of d-i or did an
advanced install or something, but I doubt it. I was even more inept a
year ago than I am now.

Why was Reiser3 phased out? It wasn't *grossly* unstable or anything,
and despite lack of maintenance it was still a good little filesystem
that could have stayed for longer.

And why UFS? It may be obsolete, but I should think it would be
relatively stable. Surely a filesystem should only be removed when it
is actually a steaming wreck, not just when the devs don't like it

Reply to: