Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: fs/adfs - keep or kill it? | From | Stuart Swales <> | Date | Thu, 4 Apr 2019 21:44:24 +0100 |
| |
On 04/04/2019 11:35, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > Hi, > > Recently, a couple of issues have been identified in fs/adfs: > > 1. Filename truncation may not work as it should, and Linus has > apparently expressed a desire to kill this off. > > 2. Scanning the ADFS map for disc object fragments may mistakenly > find free space fragments in addition to real disc object fragments, > leading to chunks of free space appearing in files or directories. > > No one has reported any issues with the filesystem module, so the > question has to be asked whether there are any users of this code? > > I'm aware that there were some users about ten or more years ago. I've > only touched it when problems have been reported to me that needed me > to investigate something, otherwise I haven't used it myself - so the > code largely just sits there, mostly untouched except for the odd > cross-filesystem patch. > > The last "feature" patch was in 2011 by Stuart Swales (copied) adding > the filetype suffix to filenames. > > That leads on to the question about whether this should be fixed in > mainline or whether we should put the code out of its misery and remove > it from the kernel. > > Fixing both issues is fairly trivial, and I already have some fixes > available, along with some improvements to the rest of the code. > However, I see little point in pushing that upstream if the code is > not being used. > > Searching the web, there does seem to be some interest on some forums, > but that dates from about three years ago, but it also seems that more > functional solutions (using fuse, with different format support) are > available. > > Posting to Linux lists probably isn't the best way to find out whether > there are users of this, so if there are people involved in the Acorn > communities, please pass this on to more appropriate forums, thanks. > Please ensure that replies reach me as I don't monitor random web > forums for example (a reply on a web forum that I don't see is not > helpful.) > > If I hear nothing positive towards keeping it, then I'll schedule > fs/adfs for deletion, probably for 5.3. > > Thanks. >
Thanks Russell
Have posted on the RISC OS Open site. I imagine some people will complain just because they can. Can't see a need for it in new kernels myself; people can always use old systems if they need to get data off old ADFS IDE drives like I had to.
Regards,
Stuart -- Stuart Swales
--- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
| |