On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 11:25:14PM -0800, Maxim Sobolev wrote: >> >> I am reviewing differences between amd64 and i386 GENERIC kernels and >> noticed that for some unclear reason we ship amd64 GENERIC with NTFS module >> compiled in, while i386 without it. IMHO both should match. The question is >> whether NTFS should be i386 way (opt in) or amd64 way (opt out) in GENERIC? >> What do people think? > > given that the sysutils/fusefs-ntfs seems to be much better, I'd rather > remove the in-kernel ntfs from both and replace with a note on what to do to > use fusefs-ntfs There was a long thread on this topic on arch_at_, maybe 6 months ago, in which it was concluded that: (1) fusefs is fairly (quite) unstable if used intensively (2) our kernel ntfs code is much faster for read-only operation I doubt either of these has changed significantly in that time, but I'm willing to be surprised. I watched my office-mate here at the CL suffer through the fuse/ntfs support on FreeBSD 7.x for several weeks before giving up and using UFS on his larger USB-attached storage. He saw a range of panics in that time, all in fuse. Robert N M Watson Computer Laboratory University of CambridgeReceived on Mon Jan 19 2009 - 15:33:57 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:40 UTC