I saw this question on another mailing list, not related to Linux.
Someone has a DD dump of a ReiserFS partition. Can it be mounted as a
file and read? Under Linux, I would try mounting it as a loopback
device, but will even that work?
I know that some file systems store data as sector addresses
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 01:52:57PM +0200, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
I saw this question on another mailing list, not related to Linux.
Someone has a DD dump of a ReiserFS partition. Can it be mounted as a
file and read? Under Linux, I would try mounting it as a loopback
device
Under Linux it will work
Under MacOS it will not work - no ReiserFS support that I know of
M
- Geoffrey S. Mendelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I saw this question on another mailing list, not related to Linux.
Someone has a DD dump of a ReiserFS partition. Can it be mounted as a
file
On 08/23/2005 10:22 AM, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
1. Encrypting entire filesystems:
In case it's relevant, note that in some circumstances, any user with
write access to any part of that filesystem can get your key in a few
dozen milliseconds:
Eran Tromer wrote:
On 08/23/2005 10:22 AM, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
1. Encrypting entire filesystems:
In case it's relevant, note that in some circumstances, any user with
write access to any part of that filesystem can get your key in a few
dozen milliseconds:
the same units. Or
somewhat compatible units, for that fact.
gparted[0] is supposed to help with this by combining both steps into
one, making sure that the right numbers are passed to both programs.
I don't remember why it didn't work for me, maybe it failed to work with
reiserfs (as far as I
for the input.
Did you do this with reiserfs?
--Amos
No. Only enlarging a partition, which worked well. I have managed to
almost destroy a partition table with parted due to the horrible
interface. I do hope it has improved in the last two years.
--
Tzafrir Cohen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | VIM
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 06:03:20PM +0300, Gil Freund wrote:
On 4/30/05, Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have to shrink a bit my single Reiserfs 3.6 filesystem to make room
for Ubuntu (which I'd like to install, not just experiment).
I have good experience
On 5/1/05, Tzafrir Cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However fdisk can't tell whwere the filesystem ends. It is not its job.parted, OTOH, insists on doing too much: not only chaniging thepartition size, but also messing with the filesystem resizing. What Iwould like is a simple tool to reduce the
Hi,
I have to shrink a bit my single Reiserfs 3.6 filesystem to make room
for Ubuntu (which I'd like to install, not just experiment).
It looks like it should be strigh-forward, with GNU Parted doing the both
the filesystem and partition resizing in one go
(e.g. http://www.newsforge.com/os/03/10
On Sat, Apr 30, 2005 at 09:41:53PM +1000, Amos Shapira wrote:
It looks like it should be strigh-forward, with GNU Parted doing the both
the filesystem and partition resizing in one go
(e.g. http://www.newsforge.com/os/03/10/07/2028234.shtml).
Last time I tried, working with parted made it
time I tried, working with parted made it much too easy to makesimple errors. e.g: you have to define quite a few parameter sizes allthe time. qtparted gives a much safer interface.
Thanks for the input.
Did you do this with reiserfs?
--Amos
On 4/30/05, Amos Shapira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have to shrink a bit my single Reiserfs 3.6 filesystem to make room
for Ubuntu (which I'd like to install, not just experiment).
I have good experience with resize_reiserfs. However I did this on
LVM. Parted scared me
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At last, I have time to post again. Thanks, Ira, for the little advices.
And thanks to all the other guys for making fun of Ira's single luser,
it cheered me up a bit.
Ira Abramov wrote:
| Quoting Amir Yalon, from the post of Wed, 19 Jan:
|
|Hello
Hello again. Now when the computer boots, the filesystem is read-only,
which renders the system unusable. What might be the cause for this?
Nothing interesting in
dmesg
although it is different from the last /var/log/dmesg on the filesystem
(which is read-only, remember?)
I am leaving this for
Quoting Amir Yalon, from the post of Wed, 19 Jan:
Hello again. Now when the computer boots, the filesystem is read-only,
which renders the system unusable. What might be the cause for this?
that's the default behavior for any unix system if I'm not wrong. it
gets remounted as RW after it passes
Hey Ira..
Many of the geeks reading this mailing list are single lusers and
sometimes - yes - it's because something with them is really wrong.
So it may be for a good reason but one day I hope they'll leave single
luser mode and find someone to mount and hopefully fork...
sorry couldn't help it
Lior Kesos wrote:
I recently went up to runlevel 4 - that's the reason I hardly get any
sleep at night ...
Lior.
You think running at 4 is tough? Try running at 6.
Shachar
--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com/
Man you have 4 kids?!!!
How do you find the time to do all that wine hacking?
I remember when I got married back then in runlevel 2 I had a few more
proccess but I could still hack a bit and play...
Then came run level 3 and freedom was witheld from me - tons of new
proccess - diapers and doctors
I have to humbly admit I did not understand most of your email. I'll
just answer the part I do understand, then.
Lior Kesos wrote:
Man you have 4 kids?!!!
begin part I understood
How do you find the time to do all that wine hacking?
What wine hacking. Sadly, I haven't actually programed in
Hello, I am sorry that I am joining this list only now that I need help,
but hope you give me a warm welcome.
Bottom line of the long story is that I did something like
rm -r /
and only hit Ctrl-C after a short while. I did it this morning from a
remote shell and all I know is that the /bin dir
update:
I am now at home running knoppix (thank you Klaus!), following the steps
described in one of the comments to the post I mentioned. These steps
involve
dd if=/dev/hda3 of=/mnt/hda5/hda3.img
losetup /dev/loop0 /mnt/hda5/hda3.img
reiserfsck --rebuild-tree -S -l /mnt/hda5/recovery.log
I agree with EZ, on a production system, I wouldn't use JBOD to hold
data, nor back it up, hard disks these days are not that expensive, what
more, on the suggested deployment, should a disk fail you will loose the
content of both disks, whereas using any sort of redundant array, you
will
Quoting Liran Cohen, from the post of Mon, 20 Dec:
I agree with EZ, on a production system, I wouldn't use JBOD to hold
data, nor back it up, hard disks these days are not that expensive, what
they ARE expensive. I have limited room in my 1U. Maybe one day I WILL
add another disk (no raid at
howdie folks, me again...
I have a new server to install here, it's a modern board with an adaptec
sata RAID that is not seen by a vanilla Debian kernel. I decided to
stick to stock kernels to simplify administration and therefore disabled
the RAID, got the two disks to show as SATA again (hde
Well...
Ira Abramov wrote:
howdie folks, me again...
I have a new server to install here, it's a modern board with an adaptec
sata RAID that is not seen by a vanilla Debian kernel. I decided to
stick to stock kernels to simplify administration and therefore disabled
the RAID, got the two
Quoting Ez-Aton, from the post of Mon, 20 Dec:
as raid1. I can have swap partitions without RAID and the backup
directory as RAID0 instead of RAID1 for instance.
questions -
1. Is that the best methodology to follow? any other recommendations?
I would have recommended using raid0, but
I would never use raid0 on a production system. Just not worth it.
However, both home system and raid1 are another thing.
BTW - You cannot boot from a raid0 partition. You need to have your
/boot on a non-striping raid (that is, none, or raid1).
Ez./
Ira Abramov wrote:
Quoting Ez-Aton,
Hi
I have my var partition on an lvm logical volume, with reiserfs on it.
I recently resized it from 6 GB to 10GB, which seemed to work without any
problems.
I'm now getting these warnings from ReiserFS:
ReiserFS: dm-1: warning: vs-8115: get_num_ver: not directory item
I don't know what
I'd recommand you to join the ResierFS users mailing list, ReiserFS'
creatros were EXTREMLY responsive to anything reportted there back when
I asked about problems with it.
BTW - ReiserFS was officially released and claims to be significantly
faster. If you have a chance to reformat your disk
Hi
I send a message to the reiserfs list, and I got this reply, so I guess I
didn't need to worry.
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: warning: vs-8115
Date: Saturday 28 August 2004 18:15
From: Christian Mayrhuber [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Haggai Eran [EMAIL
Shaul Karl wrote:
I believe you both imply that Reiser is a general purpose fs, much
like ext[23]. My very limited experience, admittedly with an older
version and with much smaller partition, differs. I wouldn't use it
when a general purpose fs will do.
I seem to recall being throught this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BTW - ReiserFS was officially released and claims to be significantly
faster. If you have a chance to reformat your disk then you might want
Oops I ment Reiser 4, the new version.
Cheers,
--Amos
Hi
I managed to get a reiserfs filesystem corruption in a number of
computers. In the logs I ssee the message:
__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed
From looking at the source I could only ssee that it means something is
fishy. From searching I see many related messages around kernel-2.4.10
never happen.
In one case replacing reiserfs with ext3 made the problem go away.
Naturally this is a drastic solution that I don't want to take.
Anybody seen this lately?
Actually, yes, on lkml, unless my memory is playing tricks on me. But
I don't remember the details, sorry. Try the archives
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Hi
I managed to get a reiserfs filesystem corruption in a number of
computers. In the logs I ssee the message:
__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed
From looking at the source I could only ssee that it means something is
fishy. From searching I see many related messages
Can you elaborate on the circumstances / environment?
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Hi
I managed to get a reiserfs filesystem corruption in a number of
computers. In the logs I ssee the message:
__alloc_pages: 0-order allocation failed
From looking at the source I could only ssee that it means
of memory. Unless the machines are pretty much out of memory,
that should never happen.
In one case replacing reiserfs with ext3 made the problem go away.
Naturally this is a drastic solution that I don't want to take.
Anybody seen this lately?
Actually, yes, on lkml, unless my memory
allocation failed means the kernel couldn't allocate even one
page of memory. Unless the machines are pretty much out of memory,
that should never happen.
In one case replacing reiserfs with ext3 made the problem go away.
Naturally this is a drastic solution that I don't want to take
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Hi all,
As some of you may remeber, I complained about reiserfs problems a while
back. After the problem became really frequent, I removed all
proprietary modules from the kernel. The very fist boot after switching
to a non-tainted kernel
Hi all,
As some of you may remeber, I complained about reiserfs problems a while
back. After the problem became really frequent, I removed all
proprietary modules from the kernel. The very fist boot after switching
to a non-tainted kernel, the problem happened again.
Luckily, I have free
Did you try checking for bad blocks using dd if=/dev/hda9 of=/dev/null ?
Shachar Tal
Verint Systems
-Original Message-
From: Shachar Shemesh [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 12:25 AM
To: Ez-Aton
Cc: Linux-IL
Subject: Re: Reiserfs acting up
Ez-Aton
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 12:37:42AM +0200, Ez-Aton wrote:
And about the modules - is it not wise removing unused modules?
It makes no difference at all. What purpose would it supposedly serve?
--
Muli Ben-Yehuda
http://www.mulix.org | http://mulix.livejournal.com/
the nucleus of linux
Tal, Shachar wrote:
Did you try checking for bad blocks using dd if=/dev/hda9 of=/dev/null ?
Shachar Tal
Verint Systems
I did now.
To me, the bad sector theory doesn't add up. There are no errors
reported from the IDE driver, dd does not encounter problems, there is
no data corruption that
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
It makes no difference at all. What purpose would it supposedly serve?
Freing up memory, sometimes some modules have bugs and can be exploited in
ways beyond us, and also, software tends to interract.
--Ariel
--
Muli Ben-Yehuda
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:16:01PM +0200, Ariel Biener wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
It makes no difference at all. What purpose would it supposedly serve?
Freing up memory,
Until recently, unloading module didn't actually free up the memory,
IIRC. In any case,
On Wed, 2003-11-12 at 21:27, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:16:01PM +0200, Ariel Biener wrote:
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Muli Ben-Yehuda wrote:
It makes no difference at all. What purpose would it supposedly serve?
Freing up memory,
Until recently, unloading
63372 1 [usb-storage printer scanner hid
usbmouse usbkbd usb-uhci]
rtc 6792 0 (autoclean)
reiserfs 191056 5 (autoclean)
ext2 36352 1 (autoclean)
ext3 65316 0 (autoclean)
jbd42760 0
3648 0 [keybdev mousedev hid usbmouse usbkbd]
usb-uhci 23600 0 (unused)
usbcore63372 1 [usb-storage printer scanner hid
usbmouse usbkbd usb-uhci]
rtc 6792 0 (autoclean)
reiserfs 191056 5 (autoclean
printer scanner hid
usbmouse usbkbd usb-uhci]
rtc 6792 0 (autoclean)
reiserfs 191056 5 (autoclean)
ext2 36352 1 (autoclean)
ext3 65316 0 (autoclean)
jbd42760 0 (autoclean) [ext3]
ide
.
or it might be some PCI device malefunctioning.
I'm now leaning torwards a reiserfs deadlock of some kind. The problem
is just not reproducable enough.
My two cents and a dime.
Ez.
Don't know about this problem, but why are do you keep just about every
module under the sun loaded?
I don't
to function without a problem.
or it might be some PCI device malefunctioning.
I'm now leaning torwards a reiserfs deadlock of some kind. The problem
is just not reproducable enough.
My two cents and a dime.
Ez.
Don't know about this problem, but why are do you keep just about every
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Just a comment:
You create a special partition for this, and it is supposed to have large
directories with lots of small files. Did you consider use reiserfs?
yes, I know ext2/3 is not a good choice, (quadratic behaviour on copy).
reiserfs would have been my first
Guy Baruch wrote:
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
Just a comment:
You create a special partition for this, and it is supposed to have
large
directories with lots of small files. Did you consider use reiserfs?
yes, I know ext2/3 is not a good choice, (quadratic behaviour on copy).
reiserfs
Quoting Guy Baruch, from the post of Thu, 17 Oct:
man mkreiserfs gives:
BUGS
No other blocksizes but 4k are available.
so using reiserfs will not save space. ext2/3 do have 1K block-size.
Reiser will fold the tails of several files into a single block, and
small files may
On Thu, Oct 17, 2002, Ira Abramov wrote about Re: why not reiserfs:
another way to go about it, is not to use a disk partition as your
hyrarchial DB, but use a relational DB instead and suck all those pesky
tiny files into mySQL.
By the way, Hans Reiser's original rationale for writing
Quoting Nadav Har'El, from the post of Thu, 17 Oct:
By the way, Hans Reiser's original rationale for writing ReiserFS was
not to write a journaling filesystem that will take over Linux, per se
- it was *exectly* to write a filesystem that will alleviate the need
for database files
On Thursday 17 October 2002 10:12 am, Guy Baruch wrote:
man mkreiserfs gives:
BUGS
No other blocksizes but 4k are available.
so using reiserfs will not save space. ext2/3 do have 1K block-size.
I do the copy once. Since this is a home-server (no more than 2-3
queries a day
Hi,
Updated media is now available. Version is 0.5.3. Please note that
there is NO Version 0.5.1 and 0.5.2 (which were internal to where
I work).
Request:
In an e-mail exchange with Dean Carpenter, we disagreed whether
the install media should set the network to DHCP or
On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 03:47:51PM +0300, Skliarouk Arie wrote:
Hi!
Where could I download one please?
Well, my home page is a possible first place.
if you mean http://bard.org.il/ then it is not what I looked for.
I am _marc_. My email is [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_Could_ it be that my
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 08:17:39AM +0300, Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
Yes , please.
Do you have it on an FTP / HTTP / TFTP / CIFS / NFS / NSA / TLA / ZMODEM
publicly available site somewhere? ;-)
Not yet. My ADSL line will support 64k upstream. I can push it to
my web site, but the line will
Come and get it:
http://www.bard.org.il/~marc/linux/rfs/deb-0.5.iso
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word unsubscribe in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 01:19:43PM +0300, Official Flamer/Cabal NON-Leader wrote:
http://www.bard.org.il/~marc/linux/rfs/deb-0.5.iso
Well, gilad got one and nbase got one ;-)
http://www.bard.org.il/webalizer
which I installed just to see what goes on ;-).
Hello, children.
A modified (slightly) Debian installation CD has been made
by yours falsely. It installs a sid system, with 2.4.5 and
reiserfs. It asks no questions as it goes. It knows about
hardware RAID. It's a 50MB bootable CD images.
Anybody wants one?
--
---MAV
Hello Everyone!
I have a pretty major problem: I had a little crash (had to hard-reboot)
and one of the partitions of mine wasn't recovered after the boot.
All the other 2 reiserfs + 1 ext2fs were successfully recovered.
The thing is that the partition was pretty full, and when I'm trying
Hello Everyone!
I have a pretty major problem: I had a little crash (had to hard-reboot)
and one of the partitions of mine wasn't recovered after the boot.
All the other 2 reiserfs + 1 ext2fs were successfully recovered.
The thing is that the partition was pretty full, and when I'm
Hi,
In case you missed it on /. here is a link to a benchmark about the
different filesystems described in the subject line. Note taht the
benchmark is in Spanish, but you can use babelfish or systrans to
translate it to English. The article can be found here
al Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shlomi Fish
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 8:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Checking for bad sectors in a ReiserFS partition
Hi!
It seems one of my ReiserFS partitions got corrupted, and
Hi Oren,
Im sorry I didnt pay attention to the REISERFS thing.
At 15:25 18/02/01 +0200, you wrote:
Hello Eran
Are you sure that e2fsck can check for bad blocks on *REISERFS*, NOT
*EXT2* ?
About the fsck you said that can be run from init level 1, the
'normal' fsck is for ext2, not reiserfs
ad sectors, but I do think that
your problem is elsewhere.
Haim.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Shlomi Fish
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 8:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Checking for bad sectors in a ReiserFS partit
with
the "badblocks" utility. Then you feed the values 'badblocks' returns
to 'e2fsck -l badblocks_file'. I don't know if reiserfs' check utility
supports those files.
--
Best regards,
Ilya Konstantinov
=
To unsubscribe,
Hi!
It seems one of my ReiserFS partitions got corrupted, and I am able to
reproduce a problem where I constantly hear strange noises out of my
hard-disk and I get some error messages (from the kernel or something like
that) on the virtual consoles.
I'd like to check and mark the bad sectors
Hello,
I have Mandrake 7.1 at my home PC, with ReiserFS partitions.
After a power shortage when the PC wasn't properly shut down, I can't
normally boot the system.
The kernel goes OK, but when it tries to remove .pid files from /var/run I
get an "input-output error" for
Hello,
I have Mandrake 7.1 at my home PC, with ReiserFS partitions.
After a power shortage when the PC wasn't properly shut down, I can't
normally boot the system.
The kernel goes OK, but when it tries to remove .pid files from /var/run I
get an "input-output error" for every file
Mike Almogy wrote:
Hi list.
Does ReiserFS has any problems with Raid 5 (Hardware) ?
Does Linux supports Compaq Raid arrays ?
This is two questions at once...
1. ReiserFS is device-agnostic, i.e. it _will_ run on
RAID 0,1,2,3,4,5,10,01, etc arrays.
2. Linux has some support
"Marc A. Volovic" wrote:
2. Linux has some support for Compaq array controllers. I do not know
their worth.
As Compaq actively pushes Linux based solutions, and they continually
claim that Linux runs flawlessly on all their systems, I believe that
there is pretty good support.
I have seen
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
"Marc A. Volovic" wrote:
2. Linux has some support for Compaq array controllers. I do not know
their worth.
As Compaq actively pushes Linux based solutions, and they continually
claim that Linux runs flawlessly on all their systems, I believe that
there is pretty
Hi list.
Does ReiserFS has any problems with Raid 5 (Hardware) ?
Does Linux supports Compaq Raid arrays ?
Thanks,
Mike
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body,
Just FYI:
SuSE 6.4 also has full ReiserFS support. Check out the one-CD-eval version
on any well-sorted download site.
Sincerely,
Schlomo Schapiro
---
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.schapiro.org
On Wed, 16 Aug 2000, Evgeny Zemlerub wrote:
Mandrake 7.1 can do
I'd like to install Linux in two places with ReiserFS as root. The reason
is that the hard-disk I am going to use is 15 GB, and running ext2.fsck on
it will take 15 minutes or so, which is unacceptable. ReiserFS OTOH has
journalling so it will be better.
Now, I have a RH6.1 CD at home, but I
Mandrake 7.1 can do it.
The expirience is really positive :-)
Shlomi Fish wrote:
I'd like to install Linux in two places with ReiserFS as root. The reason
is that the hard-disk I am going to use is 15 GB, and running ext2.fsck on
it will take 15 minutes or so, which is unacceptable
You Wrote:
Oh, I read that quotation when it was published. It is a simple
statistics-based interpretation, and not something fair to base
judgement on. These 8 vulnerabilities were not Mandrake's (but
shared for all the Linuxes), and most of them are not dangerous
for people with the
You Wrote:
Last thing: There is an Axiom that RH is better for servers while
Mandrake is better for clients. But from my humble opinion, I see
the opposite, at least with the latest versions (MD7.1 vs. RH6.2):
Mandrake supports features which are important for servers (e.g.
ReiserFS, Paranoid
the need to install patches as
soon as they are available, and the delay of Mandrake in providing
the wu-ftpd patch looked very bad.
The shortest but most practical response I received, was from Izar:
I used ReiserFS off a Mandrake box over
NFS. It didn't work well, but it worked.
?
chance for such a damage with ReiserFS is much lower.
you don't know that, the failure statistics are not there yet.
I think I'll adopt Ira's suggestion, and try it.
I wish I had the time myself. I'm sure there's no problem with two
machines (server and mounter), the problems begin with
You wrote:
Thank you all, Yosi, Tzafrir, Oleg, Ira, Chen, and Izar.
You're welcome.
I wish I could use a distro ready with special security patches
(maybe KRUD?).
Ohhh, but you can. I did not include this in my previous reply because I
thought it is irrelevant to your question. There is
[Izar: Note the question at the bottom of the message]
Regarding GNOME vs. KDE: I didn't ask which is better; It's a
religious question, and involves personal taste, etc. I only asked
if one of them is more suitable to RH while another one is more
define "suitable" then? they are not
On Mon, 3 Jul 2000, Eli Marmor wrote:
Thank you all, Yosi, Tzafrir, Oleg, Ira, Chen, and Izar.
To say that now I'm less confused than before, will not be correct,
but I'll try to use your generous responses to make decisions.
Anyway, some notes:
"Mandrake also wins (hands down) the
Hi,
I think that I asked a similar question in the past, but didn't get
a clear answer:
Does the ResierFS version, *which is built in Mandrake-7.1*, support
NFS and can be exported to other machines on the LAN?
I don't ask if ReiserFS is great, or if it had problems in some of
its versions. I
On Sun, 2 Jul 2000, Eli Marmor wrote:
Does the ResierFS version, *which is built in Mandrake-7.1*, support
NFS and can be exported to other machines on the LAN?
as before, no one here has really tested for sure, you are welcome to
tell us how it works for you or join their devel list and see
sktops, though.
Last thing: There is an Axiom that RH is better for servers while
Mandrake is better for clients. But from my humble opinion,I see
the opposite, at least with the latest versions (MD7.1 vs. RH6.2):
Mandrake supports features which are important for servers (e.g.
ReiserFS, Paranoid security
with the latest versions (MD7.1 vs. RH6.2):
Mandrake supports features which are important for servers (e.g.
ReiserFS, Paranoid security, etc.), while RH looks better for
clients (e.g. easier installation, office apps, etc.). Am I wrong?
Red Hat is clearly mass-market oriented. However, they probably
I'm a little confused. So many people repeat what I've already known
for a long time - that ReiserFS is much better than all the others,
in almost any aspect. On the other hand, there is still no clear
answer regarding NFS support, and a file-system without NFS support,
is like nothing. IIRC
On Mon, Jun 19, 2000 at 11:25:58AM +0300, Eli Marmor wrote:
Using the ReiserFS *OF* Mandrake 7.1, may I have problems exporting
it to other computers?
I always wondered about that ReiserFS w/ NFS issue.
AFAIK, only lately a whole NFS server was included in the kernel
(thus running in kernel
reiserfs work with Software RAID already, or not yet? Will it ever? For
many corporate users (including me), this is a really important point.
no reason for ME to ever look back, that is :-)
NFS over reiser, reser over RAID, reiser over LVM, all those remain to
be tested. your humble servant has
"Marc A. Volovic" wrote:
Gavrie Philipson wrote:
Nice to hear. However, the question remains: what about RAID? Does
reiserfs work with Software RAID already, or not yet? Will it ever? For
many corporate users (including me), this is a really important point.
Sof
On Sun, 18 Jun 2000, Pavel Bibergal wrote:
Can anyone tell me what good and bad in reiserfs comparing to ext2?
and what the differents at all? how does it work?
it's journaling, it's self-optimizing, it saves space by folding file
tails into semi-occupied clusters, it is open to plugable
Is it faster ?
Ira Abramov wrote:
On Sun, 18 Jun 2000, Pavel Bibergal wrote:
Can anyone tell me what good and bad in reiserfs comparing to ext2?
and what the differents at all? how does it work?
it's journaling, it's self-optimizing, it saves space by folding file
tails into semi
Yes, it is.
Ben-Nes Michael wrote:
Is it faster ?
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
1 - 100 of 112 matches
Mail list logo
