Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!udel!rochester!cornell!uw-beaver!ubc-cs!alberta!aunro!aupair.cs.athabascau.ca!rwa
From: rwa@cs.athabascau.ca (Ross Alexander)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Where is Minix headed?
Keywords: alternative Minix... let's do it!
Message-ID: <371@aupair.cs.athabascau.ca>
Date: 18 Oct 90 15:13:50 GMT
References: <33514@nigel.ee.udel.edu> <7956@star.cs.vu.nl> <612@eds1.UUCP> <33778@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Organization: Athabasca University
Lines: 22

pezely@cis.udel.edu (Cowboy Dan) writes:
>Sure thing.  I'll work on BSD fast file systems for 16bit (PC/AT) MFM
>disk controllers and then for the Adaptec SCSI controller.  

Huh?  The MFM and SCSI disk drivers are already written, to the best
of my knowledge.  The FFS doesn't rely on the underlying hardware for
anything other than storing the bits :-) [an aside: well, of course it
assumes quite a bit about geometry (tracks, cylinders, heads,
rotational delays, chained reads/writes, & c. & c.) but this doesn't
mean the code varies as a function of SCSI / MFM / RLL / IDE / ESDI /
SMD / IPI / what-have-you, just that a well designed implementation
won't choke in the face of these variations].  What we have here is a
statement of intent to commit layering violation(s).  Please don't do
it.

This is not to say that a FFS isn't welcome.  Au contrare', it's
massively desirable (at least by myself).  Please let us know how you're
making out, it's an excellent project.  Thanks for starting work.

-- 
--
Ross Alexander    rwa@cs.athabascau.ca    (403) 675 6311    ve6pdq