Paragon Looks To Upstream Their Microsoft exFAT Driver For The Linux Kernel

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Paragon Looks To Upstream Their Microsoft exFAT Driver For The Linux Kernel

With the upcoming Linux 5.4 kernel release there is now an exFAT file-system driver based on an old Samsung code drop of their exFAT driver support for mobile devices. This comes after Microsoft made the exFAT specification public recently and gave their blessing for a native Linux driver for the file-system. The Linux developers acknowledge though the current exFAT code is "horrible" and a "pile of crap" but is within the staging area...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Microsoft-exFAT-Paragon-Prop

[Hi-Angel]

Great news, keep it up Paragon!

[skeevy420]

The Linux developers acknowledge though the current exFAT code is "horrible" and a "pile of crap" but is within the staging area...

That's one thing I've always loved about open source developers -- they keep it real. I hugging hope it stays that way.

As always, gotta be happy that we're getting new stuff in the kernel

Better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it

[skeevy420]

micheal
Why is it I can call a person, concept, or thing a retarded fuckstick and that gets approved whereas something positive gets unapproved?

I honestly find it odd that some of the most offensive stuff gets approved and the most tame stuff is unapproved (not only with myself but others as well).

[Hi-Angel]

micheal
Why is it I can call a person, concept, or thing a retarded fuckstick and that gets approved whereas something positive gets unapproved?

I honestly find it odd that some of the most offensive stuff gets approved and the most tame stuff is unapproved (not only with myself but others as well).

Bad luck :c Don't be sad!

[ssokolow]

micheal
Why is it I can call a person, concept, or thing a retarded fuckstick and that gets approved whereas something positive gets unapproved?

I honestly find it odd that some of the most offensive stuff gets approved and the most tame stuff is unapproved (not only with myself but others as well).

That's why I don't use things like Bayesian filters or machine learning to manage spam on my own stuff. Computers get confused in very weird ways and force you to have to troll through the junk anyway.

(eg. On my sites, I mostly use hand-rolled filters that send the submitter back around to try again on characteristics I wouldn't want in a human-sent message either, like trying to submit link markup to a contact form that produces plaintext e-mail, the same URL showing up more than once, e-mail addresses in the message body (as opposed to the reply-to field), and URLs which are using known URL shorteners to disguise their destinations.)

[Hi-Angel]

It's funny to think of: one and a half year ago when I just moved to Moscow I was a candidate to a software developer at Paragon. So this guy could've been my colleague; btw, he has the same name as me! But then Bauman Moscow State University took me over, and I went to work there.

No regrets though, their office is pretty far away. It wouldn't be a problem back then as I could find a room in vicinity. But it would be now that I have a girlfriend that I live with.

[Sonadow]

I will strongly prefer the kernel developers to improve on Microsoft's driver than use other implementations.

Just because exFAT is Microsoft's filesystem and their code is the reference implementation of exFAT.

You never know what kind of quirks or strange behavior could result from third-party implementations under very fringe or rare situations.

[tildearrow]

micheal
Why is it I can call a person, concept, or thing a retarded fuckstick and that gets approved whereas something positive gets unapproved?

I honestly find it odd that some of the most offensive stuff gets approved and the most tame stuff is unapproved (not only with myself but others as well).

It's the word "love" that gets your post unapproved.

[F.Ultra]

I will strongly prefer the kernel developers to improve on Microsoft's driver than use other implementations.

Just because exFAT is Microsoft's filesystem and their code is the reference implementation of exFAT.

You never know what kind of quirks or strange behavior could result from third-party implementations under very fringe or rare situations.

There is no guarantee what so ever that the exFAT code from Microsoft is anything like the code for exFAT that they have in Windows. So no we do not know if that really is a reference implementation.