Chris Snook wrote:
Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Chris Snook wrote:
>> -CONFIG_EXT3_FS=m
>> +CONFIG_EXT3_FS=y
>>
>> I've been wondering for years why we weren't already doing this.
> see above, but I can live with it. Will we add ext4 and xfs (and
> reiserfs and jfs) too?
Having one root-suitable filesystem built-in makes it easier to do a lot of
atypical boot configurations, which are becoming rather interesting thanks to
virtualization. If we're going to pick one, I think ext3 makes the most sense.
I don't see a lot of benefit to building in xfs, reiserfs, or jfs, and I think
we should definitely keep ext4 modular in its current stage of development.
-- Chris
Yeah, I agree, that's fair. (I wasn't really too serious about linking
in every fs ...) Optimizing for the common case(s) makes sense.
-Eric