Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 3rd Jan 2006 16:45 UTC, submitted by diegocg
Permalink for comment 81404
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-01-03
I guess most Linux supported filesystems are portable in a sense. Their on-disk structures are documented and the algorithms they use are known, sou you could implement a driver for any one of them in another OS.
The real problem is the complexity. The complex ones, with good fetures and performance need a great deal of code to drive them, and more code means more dependencies on the kernel they were originally designed on/to. It is still possible to port them to another OS, but it means more work (e.g. XFS was ported to Linux from IRIX, I guess most of the code is new in Linux, but it can work with partitions created on IRIX).
That said, I remember reading somewhere how the cost and licensing for the Windows Filesystem SDK was the real impediment for cross-platform(OS) filesystem development on windows.