Re: TrustedBSD...

[Hiten Pandya <hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Brooks Davis wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 09, 2003 at 02:25:28PM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
>
> > Additionally it seems possible to implement a good portion of the
> > TrustedBSD stuff along with the symlink-/filesystem work!? Maybe it's
> > good to put it in there to get a more "native" solution for DF rather
> > then modifying ufs with yet another (suboptimal) patchset.
> >
> > Or did I get the idea of the new stuff wrong?
>
>
> Modification of the on disk format of UFS was pretty much require for
> fast labeling of ondisk content (lableing of UFS1 file systems, is
> possiable, but VERY expensive because the labels are stored in a file
> like quotas), but that's only a small part of the work involved in
> making a trusted OS.  UFS2 made many more changes then were required for
> TrustedBSD because a need to break binary compatability was seen as a
> good time to fix all the 32-bit crap in the ondisk format so we could
> have >>1TB file systems.

	Not only that... we will need someone to constantly update the
	TrustedBSD framework port, which is a very time consuming task.
	
	I think we should let this project be left to the TrustedBSD
	team.  Just like they are now writing Trusted extensions for
	Darwin, such a project will exist for DragonFly one day...

	Regards,

	-- Hiten (hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)