Ken Schneider wrote:
On Mon, 2005-07-04 at 15:51 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
James Knott wrote:
Or more correctly, if SuSE said what those reasons are, such as under certain circumstances, you'll lose all your data and cause your computer to revert back to a 4.77 MHz XT. ;-) I don't have a problem with it being pulled for technical reasons. It would just be nice to know what reasons. Very well put :-) I guess I'm just at a loss when I try to imagine what sort of technical problems they could possibly have had?? What has changed so dramatically in 9.3 that a file-system that was supported in 9.2 couldn't be supported in 9.3? JFS certainly hasn't changed much - the most recent 2 releases were mostly bug-fixes.
With JFS being contributed by IBM and the pending lawsuit from you know who against IBM perhaps SuSE is taking a more conservative approach.
I forgot about that. JFS was originally developed for OS/2 and then ported to AIX. Since AIX was developed under a Unix licence, JFS suddenly became a derivative work, that's now "owned" by SCO.