Reiser4 File-System Comes To Linux 3.5 Kernel

[disi]

A name change won't save ReiserFS. People will still associate it with that asshole.

Just let Reiser/ReiserFS die already and instead support Btrfs or another FS.

I don't really trust things done by Oracle, once hooked to the FS it might become closed souce and then forked into all four 'cardinal points'...

[Teho]

I don't really trust things done by Oracle, once hooked to the FS it might become closed souce and then forked into all four 'cardinal points'...

File System Design Goals and History
Created by Chris Mason at Oracle, the initial design for Btrfs has its roots in a presentation by Ohad Rodeh about copy-on-write friendly B-tree implementations at the USENIX FAST '07 conference. Mason based the Btrfs design on his experience developing the ReiserFS file system (extent-based storage, packing of small files) and the idea to store data and metadata in B-tree structures. After several months of internal development, Btrfs was presented to the Linux community in June 2007. Since then, Oracle engineers have continued to maintain and advance its development. They work in close collaboration with many contributors from the Linux community, including engineers from Linux distributors, such as Red Hat and SUSE, and other companies, such as Dreamhost, Fujitsu, HP, IBM, and Intel. Today, Btrfs is included in the mainline Linux kernel and is gaining popularity through several Linux distributions, including Oracle Linux.

Chris Mason, the principal author of the Btrfs filesystem, has left Oracle for solid-state enterprise-level storage specialists Fusion-io. While at Fusion-io, which also employs Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak as its chief scientist, Mason says he will continue maintaining and developing the advanced Linux filesystem.

So yeah. It's a project that has been open source under GPL since 2007; that has been included in mainline Linux kernel since 2009; whose creator has switched companies; that doesn't have contributor license agreements. Oracle couldn't possibly make it closed source even if they wanted not to mention that it would make absolutely no sense for them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/ar...s-1695246.html
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/it...e-1612793.html

[D0pamine]

To be honest I only use reiserfs for my own personal use.. it is rock solid and i've never had any issues other than the fact that one of the developers is a murdering son-bitch...

to say its a shit filesystem is just wrong - it isn't!! to say i dont want that wife murdering bastards code running on my system is fair enough though

hence my suggestion to change the name and do what the GPL allows us to do...

[droidhacker]

I don't really trust things done by Oracle, once hooked to the FS it might become closed souce and then forked into all four 'cardinal points'...

Guess what? Btrfs is mainline, part of the Linux kernel. There is absolutely nothing that Oracle can possibly do. They can't change the license on it, they can't close source it, the only possibility for them is that THEY could fork it.

Unlike openoffice, where libreoffice had to be forked away from Oracle (and was actually a very pleasant forking, if I do say so...), btrfs would NOT have to be forked to remain in Linux.

So if Oracle decides that they no longer want to contribute, btrfs will still be there with contributions from everyone else.

[curaga]

True, but just like about one person in the world understands RCU, we don't exactly have a surplus of COW-filesystem devs

[grok]

I'm sure it's a killer FS!
just don't get it if you have a wife or significant other.

"If he couldn't be bothered to clean up blood from his car and to get rid of his books on homicide, how the hell can we trust this guy to free memory on the heap?" -- ez76 (Slashdot)

[frantaylor]

Name changes are no big deal.

SunOS => Solaris

Ultrix => Digital Unix => OSF/1 => Tru64

Iris GL => OpenGL

Yellow Pages => NIS

RedHat => Fedora

Metro => ???

"Name changes are HARD"??? HUH??

Yeah because sed "s/reiserfs/loserfs/g" is just TOO HARD. After all we are COMPUTER PEOPLE.

[tux9656]

How is the stability of reiser4 on 3.5? I tried it some time ago on a 2.6 kernel, I think 2.6.<twenty something>, on a reformat of my home partition and the filesystem got corrupted after only about 5 minutes of normal usage.

BTW, all of you that say this filesystem shouldn't be used because one of the developers murdered his wife, what about Einstein that came up with the physics behind the atomic bomb? I guess we should throw away every piece of knowledge that Einstein brought to physics, and everything the has been built upon that. I am in no way defending what Hans Reiser did. For murdering his wife, he should spend his remaining years in prison. With that said, though, sometimes good people do bad things and sometimes bad people do good things. Perhaps Hans Reiser is/was a generally good person that did a bad thing, or perhaps he is a bad person that did a good thing producing reiserfs. Either way, reiserfs/reiser4 is a good filesystem with good code. Why not use it?