Re: Filesystem recommendations
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Filesystem recommendations
- From: Ron Johnson <email@example.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 23:26:38 -0500
- Message-id: <4BDFA1FE.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- In-reply-to: <4BD54DE6.email@example.com>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org> <4BD3425F.email@example.com> <4BD3DEEF.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4BD53D53.email@example.com> <4BD542D0.firstname.lastname@example.org> <4BD54DE6.email@example.com>
On 04/26/2010 03:25 AM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> If it took only 2 weeks for the bulk of this effort, I can't
imagine they had to modify a ton of XFS code. IRIX was written in C as is
Linux, so the changes in XFS were probably fairly minor.
Windows is written in C, Linux is written in C. Thus, it should be
trivial to port Windows drivers to Linux?
Bottom line: just because two OSs are written in C doesn't mean that
(even if they are both Unix work-alikes) they have the same "guts"
(data structures, assumptions, etc).
I'd venture to guess that the most significant Linux XFS changes were those
for the 32bit X86 code base. IRIX and thus XFS were born on 64bit MIPS RISC
I *know* that part of what you wrote is wrong, since SGI started
using MIPS chips in 1986 and the MIPS 4000 is from 1991.
XFS is from 1994, so it did have it's genesis on a 64-bit platform.
Dissent is patriotic, remember?