Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.debian.user > #211294

Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster

From Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org>
Newsgroups linux.debian.user
Subject Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster
Date 2019-07-12 14:50 +0200
Message-ID <yj39U-3ig-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <yiJuy-7MG-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <yiJEd-7Qd-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <yiJEd-7Qd-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <yiYDf-tv-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <yiZfX-WU-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 11:35:20AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> I don't dispute that RedHat did a lot of good things - good chunks of
> the libc, gcc and a kernel itself is wrote by them.
> On the other side though we have some really controversial things like
> SecureBoot support, Wayland, GTK3, xfs, and s*****d.

XFS was developed by SGI, not by Red Hat.  According to wikipedia:

  Initial support for XFS in the Linux kernel came through patches from
  SGI. It merged into the Linux kernel mainline for the 2.6 series,
  and separately merged in February 2004 into the 2.4 series in
  version 2.4.25,[10] making XFS almost universally available on Linux
  systems.[11] Gentoo Linux became the first Linux distribution to
  introduce an option for XFS as the default filesystem in mid-2002.[12]

There's some stuff about Red Hat in subsequent paragraphs, and it
definitely does not paint a pretty picture of Red Hat.  If wikipedia is
to be believed, Red Hat added partial XFS support 7 years after Gentoo,
and then charged its customers extra money for the basic command line
tools.  (And then possibly stopped being evil a few years after that.
It's a little unclear.)

I'm not sure exactly what you consider "controversial" about XFS.  It's
just a file system that you can choose to use, or not.

Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

tailf vs buster Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-11 17:50 +0200
  Re: tailf vs buster Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-11 18:00 +0200
    Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-11 18:00 +0200
      Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-12 10:00 +0200
        Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 10:40 +0200
          Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2019-07-12 10:40 +0200
          Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2019-07-12 14:50 +0200
            Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-12 15:10 +0200
              Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Richard Hector <richard@walnut.gen.nz> - 2019-07-13 14:30 +0200
                Re: [SOLVED] tailf vs buster Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-14 08:50 +0200

csiph-web