Attilio Rao wrote:
quoted text
> 2008/1/26, Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>:
>> Yar Tikhiy wrote:
>>
>>> No doubt. :-) But the urgency of this problem appears much lower
>>> than that I estimated in the first place--fortunately.  Broken UFS
>>> would be a nightmare.
>> IMO if we're going to ship NTFS support in the base it should actually
>> function, or at minimum not panic the box. As I reported earlier, I can
>> panic my -current system with 100% reliability with fairly light access
>> to an NTFS volume, which I consider to be a fairly large problem, at
>> least for my personal usage pattern.
> 
> I'm not sure now, are you referring to some problems introduced by my
> patches or not?

Not sure of the timeline. I think this is the most relevant post on
the matter, let me know if there is anything I can do to help diagnose
this.

http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=644445+0+archive/2008/freebsd-current/200...

-- 

    This .signature sanitized for your protection

_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"