Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: ext3 in archos?Re: ext3 in archos?
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]
From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel_at_haxx.se>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:56:29 +0100 (CET)
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, George Michaelson wrote:
> But I think a VFS abstraction cost would be small. Its almost innate in all
> unixes, including the various uCLinux/tinyBSD, which fit on SH3 class
> processors amongst others (eg Soekris) some of which have very constrained
> memory footprints. Yes, we're SH1. but its not like arguing for gcc on a
> pdp-8.
Sure, it could be done and if someone made a low-impact (for the standard
FAT-only case) and good-looking patch for this I bet we would apply it.
Talking about its virtues is one thing. Actually providing code that works is
a totally different beast.
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 07:56:29 +0100 (CET)
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, George Michaelson wrote:
> But I think a VFS abstraction cost would be small. Its almost innate in all
> unixes, including the various uCLinux/tinyBSD, which fit on SH3 class
> processors amongst others (eg Soekris) some of which have very constrained
> memory footprints. Yes, we're SH1. but its not like arguing for gcc on a
> pdp-8.
Sure, it could be done and if someone made a low-impact (for the standard
FAT-only case) and good-looking patch for this I bet we would apply it.
Talking about its virtues is one thing. Actually providing code that works is
a totally different beast.
-- Daniel Stenberg -- http://rockbox.haxx.se/ -- http://daniel.haxx.se/Received on 2004-01-07
Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy