Journaled File System

On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 20:28 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
> The comment in the subject line was made on a mailing list by a fairly
> prominent staff member of one the major Linux distribution.
> 
> Is this correct? 

I guess it depends on what he means by "actively".  There is not much in
the way of active development, but I think I do a reasonably good job of
keeping up with changes in the mainline kernel and responding to and
fixing bugs.  Some hard-to-diagnose bugs do fall through the cracks.

I don't know the context of the comment, so I can't respond directly to
it.  I know that the enterprise distros expect a larger resource
commitment in order to support a file system, which is why jfs isn't
supported in a couple of major distributions.

Shaggy
-- 
David Kleikamp
IBM Linux Technology Center

Dave Kleikamp wrote:

> On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 20:28 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:
>> The comment in the subject line was made on a mailing list by a
>> fairly prominent staff member of one the major Linux distribution.
>> 
>> Is this correct?
> 
> I guess it depends on what he means by "actively".  There is not much
> in the way of active development, but I think I do a reasonably good
> job of keeping up with changes in the mainline kernel and responding
> to and fixing bugs. Some hard-to-diagnose bugs do fall through the 
> cracks. 
> 
> I don't know the context of the comment, so I can't respond directly
> to it. 
> I know that the enterprise distros expect a larger resource 
> commitment in order to support a file system, which is why jfs isn't
> supported in a couple of major distributions.

OK, thanks for the update.  The comment was made during a discussion of
the support for JFS in openSUSE and SLES.  SUSE Linux/openSUSE
deprecated support for JFS quite some time ago, and this was one of the
reasons given.  
We're using a lot of JFS, and the remark just made me a little uneasy. 


/Per Jessen, Zürich