um: Remove CONFIG_REISERFS_FS from defconfig

From: Peter Lafreniere <peter@n8pjl.ca>
To: peter@n8pjl.ca
Cc: anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com, geert@linux-m68k.org,
	jack@suse.cz, johannes@sipsolutions.net,
	linux-um@lists.infradead.org, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	richard@nod.at
Subject: um: Remove CONFIG_REISERFS_FS from defconfig
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 16:40:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230918164017.8827-1-peter@n8pjl.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230918163544.8604-1-peter@n8pjl.ca>

> > > Makes sense but I've noticed there are many more architectures that define
> > > CONFIG_REISERFS_FS in their defconfig (sh, powerpc, mips, m68k, ia64, arm,
> > > alpha). So perhaps we should do this for all of them when we are at it?
> > 
> > The policy for the m68k defconfigs is to enable all available exotic
> > file systems as modules, so support for them is available when needed.
> > 
> > Please let me know why this should be changed, as long as ReiserFS is
> > still available in the upstream kernel.
> 
> 
> I understand that policy and it makes particular sense for older/hobbyist
> hardware like the m68k classic where ReiserFS is included in make defconfig.
> 
> However, ReiserFS is deprecated and should be phased out as best as possible
> before its removal, and pruning config options for a filesystem that is
> considered obsolete and should not be used on the newest kernels is a step
> towards that.
> 
> ReiserFS is still availiable to be configured by anyone who builds their own
> kernel and is still availiable in all(mod|yes)config. As such I can justify
> the removal of some old config options that doesn't actually remove support for
> the filesystem when it simplifies the deprecation and removal processes for an
> ancient, largely unused filesystem.
> 
> Please remember that users who build and install their own kernel on hobbyist
> hardware should be capable enough to select one Kconfig option if they happen to
> need ReiserFS. If not, then removing ReiserFS from the defconfig on a kernel
> update is an easier issue to work around than waiting to remove the filesystem
> from the tree entirely.

Though as Jan said, you're free to not accept a patch removing the config option
until the filesystem is gone for good. I just feel like it's easier to remove
ReiserFS from all defconfigs in one fell swoop.

Cheers,

Peter Lafreniere
<peter@n8pjl.ca>

_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um