you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

Oh, okay, lazy guy. This is the pedants way of stomping their feet because they refuse to read the obvious that is already out there, you know. Go ahead and be a lil baby because your point is wrong.

Despite this, it has become clear that BcacheFS is rather unstable, with frequent and extensive patches being submitted to the point where [Linus Torvalds] in August of last year pushed back against it, as well as expressing regret for merging BcacheFS into mainline Linux. As covered in the video, [Kent] has pushed users reporting issues to upgrade to the latest Linux kernel to get critical fixes, which really reinforces the notion that BcacheFS is at best an experimental Alpha-level filesystem implementation and should probably not be used with important data or systems.

https://hackaday.com/2025/06/10/the-ongoing-bcachefs-filesystem-stability-controversy/

Literally describes the same behavior here from a different time period: https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/01/bcachefs_may_get_dropped/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Bcachefs was not kicked out because its design and implementation is of bad quality. A bad quality software is something that is: full of bugs; every 4 fixed bugs you introduce a new one; the design is so wrong that it is difficult to add new features; the code is difficult to understand.

    If you consider various metrics like irrecoverable loss of data, lines of code, features, Bcachefs is a very good project. It is under development, so the source code is not "stable" and there are frequent updates, but the behavior of the file system is fully under control and it is only improving,

  • source
  • parent