Subject: Re: Undelete for linux? From: amoss@picton.cs.huji.ac.il (Amos Shapira) Date: 1 Aug 1993 10:50:41
rohrer@fncrd6.fnal.gov (Keith Rohrer) writes:
||> |And what's DOS-ish about it? The "To be compressed, or not to be compressed"
||>
||> I ment "DOS-ish" to the way you think problems should be solved. In DOS,
||> from the little I've seen, problems are "solved" by brute-force hacking into
||> or around the "OS" while in UNIX elegancy, integrity and compatibility are
||> the main theme.
|By that logic, we shouldn't have ever added any device drivers, filesystems
|beyond the original minix, and so on. The kernel really could stand to
|be able to dynamically link in features in a clean and supported way,
|but it doesn't. If, however, one enhances the ext2 filesystem, or adds
|another filesystem under the VFS layer, that's about as elegant and contained
|as one would ever want to get. Unless you don't want to be able to
|compress transparently?
You know what? You have your point. I am convinced.
Cheers,
--Amos