> Because on a 300G hard drive and an old bios, i wanted to ensure that > the kernel is somewhere where the bios can find it.
I think you'll find that you no longer need it. Bioses since 2000 should be fine, for a multimedia box you wouldn't want anything older than that anyway. Of course, the installer should create it automatically if (and only if) needed. > Any quick pointers on why you say that (and are you suggesting 3 or 4?) I thought you said you had trouble with ext3...? ;) I've been using reiser3 for donkeys years and it's been rock-solid. Reiser4 isn't in the kernel yet, Hans is getting impatient but the Linux people (notably GKH) don't like the way the source code is formatted - I don't have much sympathy with that sort of nonsense. Reiser has significant speed advantage for handling of many small files I hear, it matters for /home and mail spools. For your mpegs not so much of an issue. > XFS was designed specifically to support media files. > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/ > http://www.sgi.com/products/software/xfs/ Interesting, I guess that's about timing. What puts me off XFS is the esoteric character, esp of the surrounding tools. I don't see a need to switch either. > ( [...] an informed discussion > on the subject of file systems would be interesting. ) Yes, but difficult. For assessing reliability you'd need a lot of data points (some guy saying "it shat itself yesterday" means nothing by itself), for speed tests you'd need to run it side-by-side on the same hardware under same conditions. That leaves "other factors" for making your choice... Volker -- Volker Kuhlmann is possibly list0570 with the domain in header http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me.
