OpenBFS Reaches Beta 37
Bruno G. Albuquerque writes "The OpenBFS Team (part of the OpenBeOS project that aims to recreate BeOS from scratch) has moved the project status to early beta. This means OpenBFS is now a 100% complete (but barely tested) replacement for the original Be File System (BFS). It is a 64 bit, multithreaded and journaled file system that supports unlimited number os extended attributes and has support some database-like functions (like ultra-fast searches based on an index). OpenBFS is written in C++ and is licensed under the MIT license."
A meeting of very clever people. (Score:1, Funny)
Clever guy 1: Why on earth should I try OpenBeOS ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX/Linux/BSD can't do?
Clever guy 2: Why on earth should I try BSD ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX/Linux can't do?
Clever guy 3: Why on earth should I try Linux ? What could it do for me that Windows/OSX can't do?
Clever guy 4: Why on earth should I try OSX ? What could it do for me that Windows can't do?
Clever guy 5: Why on earth should I try Windows ? What could it do for me?
Great For Choice (Score:1)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1, Troll)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:2, Interesting)
Just because the current implementation is in C++ doesn't mean that the only implementation is in C++. Assuming that there's some way to define inodes for this fs, writing an FS driver wouldn't be too difficult.
The tougher issue is the database aspect of this fs, as it can't be hacked into the current VFS system. The best thing I can think of is exporting a few API hooks with some userspace components to allow for this. The userspace part could be done, of course, in C++.
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1)
-Bruno
BFS for Linux page (Score:2)
One thing that bothers me about most filesystems is limited metadata support. BFS is a notable exception [osnews.com]. One hopes that KDE and GNOME developers could use this to improve on the primitive file handling tools desktop users are currently stuck with.
Re:BFS for Linux page (Score:1)
In other words, no code has been used from that Linux driver.
-Bruno
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:2)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1)
Re:Great For Choice (Score:1, Informative)
I should also mention macintosh resource forks, which is basically 2 files stored under 1 name (and slower to access and unindexed), and NTFS streams (file:stream), which are similar, but untyped and unindexed. Maybe LongHorn will change that.
Opera for BeOS (Score:2, Informative)
It's still in the 3.62 version, but has 128-bit encryption, SSL 2 and 3, TLS 1.0, HTML 3.2, JavaScript 1.1, CSS1, and plug-in support.
While it is neither free nor up to standards compared to Opera for other platforms, it is certainly better than NetPositive, imnhso.
Besides, it never hurts to have an alternative
That joke (Score:1)
Re:Of course (Score:1)
It's OSS, no one is tring to make monney from it.
Oh wow. (Score:2)
I restart my system, and lo and behold, it works. I type in 'touch t', and it successfully creates a file called t. However, I then see a box on the screen saying, "BeOS was unable to initialize a swap file." I realize something's wrong - and when I try to create another file, or do anything really, it refuses, on the account that it's a read-only file system. Of course, write support is implemented, but for some reason it was inaccessible to me.
At the end of all this, I finally manage to corrupt my filesystem, and despite replacing the original BFS driver, it refuses to boot. So I'm going to have to reinstall.
OBOS, sadly, just isn't ready for primetime yet.
Re:Oh wow. (Score:2)
Re:Oh wow. (Score:2, Informative)
I made the stupid mistake of checking out module BeFS. Apparently, I'm not the only one.
Re:Oh wow. (Score:1)
Re:Oh wow. (Score:1)
Beta software, by definition, should not be barely tested. In fact, beta software should be feature complete, basically working and usable. This means that it has gone through unit level testing, integration testing, and functional tests.
In other words, the only remaining unknown bugs are those that can only reasonably be discovered by actual volunteer users in real world situations. These users, called beta testers, generally do not have the ability to diagnose or fix any problems they find.
In still other words, beta software are already candidates for final release.
This is of course only theory, and organizations do differ on what is considered beta. However, no commercial outfit would release "barely tested" code to beta testers.
Re:Oh wow. (Score:2)
This is a BETA test of one small part of OBOS. Why on earth would you think OBOS might be ready for primetime after reading this announcement???
Note to everyone (Score:3)
If you browse the OBOS source hierarchy, you'll notice a BeFS module. Do not download that one. Strangely enough, the correct module to download is current. Why the other modules remain there, I have no idea.
If you download the wrong one, you'll get a two-month old driver; it can't write, and it will not take its time in screwing up your BeOS installation.