Matthew Wilcox writes: > On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:30:06AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > And I'm not saying that just because it's a filesystem, and people get > > upset if they lose data. No, I'm saying it because from a maintenance > > standpoint, such a filesystem has almost zero cost. > > One of the costs (and I'm not disagreeing with your main point; > I think forking ext3 to ext4 at this point is reasonable), is that > bugfixes applied to one don't necessarily get applied to the other. > I found some recently between ext2 and ext3, and submitted those, but I > only audited one file. There's lots more to look at and I just haven't > found the time recently. Going to three variations is a lot more work > for auditing, and it might be worth splitting some bits which genuinely > are the same into common code. If you want more details on this kind of issue, look at CP-Miner. A paper published earlier this year in IEEE TSE[1] reports that that tool found 421 cut-and-paste-related possible bugs in Linux, of which 49 were real bugs, 249 were false positives, and 123 could not be proven either true or false positives. [1]- http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/TSE.2006.28 Michael Poole - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
