Janito Ferreira Filho <jvffprog@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'll start implementing journal read support into the ext2 code, > however > it will then be some kind of ext2/3 hybrid. It is already, since it also supports ext3. > Should I start changing the current ext2 code and then later rename > to > ext3, or start now from a separate "clone" of the ext2 code? The main > point > is if the current ext2 directory should be leaved intact, at least > until ext3 is > stable. Thanks, That would be a candidate for a branch then. Since we also plan to support ext4, calling it ext3 wouldn't make sense either. In the long term, I would either go with the version of the latest support (ie. rename it from time to time), use "x" instead (although extx would look strange, too), or drop the version altogether (just falling it "ext" - or maybe then rename it to "extfs" instead). For now, I wouldn't worry about that, though, and just work in the ext2 directory and code :-) Bye, Axel.