> OK. I don't really care 'coz I'd probably fork my own FS
> partially based on some ideas from YAFFS/YAFFS2.
Perhaps that would be best Sergey, as you don't seem the least
interested in playing well with others.
> Please don't take it as an abuse, but YAFFS2 in its present
> state is unusable.
It's not abuse, Sergey. It's also not true. It's less than perfect,
and you have an application for which it is not working, but others are
using it well in different applications. You need to recognize that.
> It reproduceably fails as a root
> filesystem -- after several reboots (even the proper ones,
> less for a brutal powercycling a running
> system) it leaves the FS in a state that makes it crashing
> kernel on initial root FS mount (the crash is in hardlinks
> list handling code, I can even point to exact line in the
> source.)
The difference, Sergey, is that instead of whining about it, you should
point out the exact line in the source. Preferably in a patch. I am
glad you send patches. You would do yourself a favor if you always
included enough detail to reproduce your problem, and if you refrained
from the social commentary.
> I reported that bug several times, I sent a couple
> of decoded OOPSes but nobody seems to care.
You have an inappropriate set of expectations Sergey. You sent that
message on the 12th. It is now the 28th. Meanwhile, you have sent many
messages that seem designed to convince the yaffs developers to have
nothing to do with you.
Here is how the real world works, Sergey: With respect to Linux yaffs
development, Charles is a volunteer. He works on Yaffs out of the
kindness of his heart. If you wish him to be kind to you, treat him
kindly in return.
With respect to Linux yaffs development, I am a professional.
PalmSource pays me to, among other things, work on Yaffs. But they pay
me to work on the bits they care about. Unfortunately for you, those
bits all involve 512 byte pagesize parts. Any work I do on other bits of
Yaffs is voluntary, and out of the kindess of my heart. Also,
unfortunately for you, these days, they're asking me to concentrate more
on other parts of my job. Finally, I do not have current access to 2k
page NAND devices, so I can't test your patches.
> And the CVS tree still keeps the source that does not work at all and
> never ever worked.
So here's the deal, Sergey: You've got problems with yaffs. They need
fixing. They're not, however, the most pressing issues for the people
who do fix things in Yaffs, and you're not making it at all desirable
for them to fix your problems.
Do not expect rapid turnaround on your problems. I read the list every
day, and I'm aware of your issues, but I don't have 2k parts, so I can't
test your fixes, and I do have a list of other items that I'm working
on, so your problems aren't going to be on the top of my list.
Do expect that the best way to get responses is to post messages with
clear explanations of how to reproduce the problem and with patches.
The second best way is the clear explanation without the patch. The
worst way is to comment negatively.
(text/plain)