Hello.. I've stumbled upon somthing wierd. and I couldn't see anything on
the mailing-list on this subject...
On a 2.6.8.1 stock kernel booted with ramdisk_size=32000:
# mkreiserfs -f -s 1024 /dev/ram0
mkreiserfs 3.6.11 (2003 www.namesys.com)
A pair of credits:
Alexander Lyamin keeps our hardware running, and was very generous
to our
project in many little ways.
Chris Mason wrote the journaling code for V3, which was enormously more
useful
to users than just waiting until we could create a wandering log
filesystem as
Hans would have unwisely done without him.
Jeff Mahoney optimized the bitmap scanning code for V3, and performed
the big
endian cleanups.
Guessing about desired format.. Kernel 2.6.8.1 is running.
Format 3.6 with non-standard journal
Count of blocks on the device: 8000
Number of blocks consumed by mkreiserfs formatting process: 1043
Blocksize: 4096
Hash function used to sort names: "r5"
Journal Size 1024 blocks (first block 18)
Journal Max transaction length 511
inode generation number: 0
UUID: b66c61ae-3c4d-4682-932c-ee01d0d8009e
Initializing journal - 0%....20%....40%....60%....80%....100%
Syncing..ok
Tell your friends to use a kernel based on 2.4.18 or later, and especially
not a
kernel based on 2.4.9, when you use reiserFS. Have fun.
ReiserFS is successfully created on /dev/ram0.
# dd if=/dev/ram0 of=image bs=1k
32000+0 records in
32000+0 records out
# mkdir mountpoint
# mount -o loop image mountpoint -t reiserfs
# umount mountpoint
# mount /dev/ram0 mountpoint -t reiserfs
mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/ram0,
or too many mounted file systems
I just don't get the difference between mounting a file from a loopback
device and mounting a ramdisk with the same content. Could somebody please
enlighten be to the subtle difference?
Yours
--
Morten B�geskov (email: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
I just got lost in thought... It was unfamiliar territory.
