On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:47:29 +0900
David [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ext3 is best if you are dealing with a mixture of both and has the
added security factor of defaulting to Ext2 if it fails. Although I
have never had reason to find out.
I'm in the habit of using buggy and crash-prone hardware
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 05:32:25PM -0500, Allan Wind wrote:
On 2008-01-18T14:05:25-0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
(8) Is there any advantage to using ext2 for /boot rather than ext3?
no to either
/boot should not be a single partition by itself..
it is part of /bin, /lib, /sbin /etc
On Jan 18, 2008, at 1:11 PM, Jimmy Wu wrote:
(4) ReiserFS can be flaky on a system crash.
I haven't found it to be flaky on system crashes. I have found it to
be extremely unforgiving of disk corruption and IDE bus problems. I
was able to recover the data with reiserfsck, but it took a
On Jan 18, 2008, at 4:45 PM, Jimmy Wu wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008 4:27 PM, Damon L. Chesser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
xfs sure does copy and delete really large files faster - I do use it
for video at home.
How big do files have to be before one starts to notice the advantages
of XFS?
In my
Jimmy Wu wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to decide on which file systems to use for a Debian
install on a personal laptop. It's a Thinkpad T61 with one 160 GB HD.
I've looked around on Google, and come up with a lot of frustratingly
conflicting advice. For example, an article from
Jimmy Wu wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to decide on which file systems to use for a Debian
install on a personal laptop. It's a Thinkpad T61 with one 160 GB HD.
Hello Jimmy,
I have found:
Xfs is best for large file sizes, if that's what you are dealing with -
graphics, and the ilk;
Reiserfs
On 2008-01-18T16:11:17-0500, Jimmy Wu wrote:
(1) ext3 mounts and unmounts slowly, resulting in increased boot times.
I use ext3 on same hardware, and (clean) mounts do not take any
significant time:
[ 19.209034] EXT3-fs: mounted filesystem with ordered data mode.
[ 19.209039] VFS: Mounted
Wow, thanks for the many quick responses. I'm doing a group reply
to the list by quoting everyone in one message. Not sure if this is
top-posting, bottom-posting, or conversational-posting, but if this
goes against mailing list etiquette, please tell me/flame me gently,
and I won't do it again.
On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 05:32:25PM -0500, Allan Wind wrote:
On 2008-01-18T14:05:25-0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
(8) Is there any advantage to using ext2 for /boot rather than ext3?
no to either
/boot should not be a single partition by itself..
it is part of /bin, /lib, /sbin /etc
Quoth Hugo Vanwoerkom:
ext2. Never have used any other.
I seriously hope that this was a joke...
Aleks
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Quoth Jimmy Wu:
I've looked around on Google, and come up with a lot of frustratingly
conflicting advice.
That's because file systems are Voodoo. Everyone wants to take part in the
discussion, without anyone really understanding what they're talking about.
For example, an article from
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 17:32:25 -0500
Allan Wind [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2008-01-18T14:05:25-0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
(8) Is there any advantage to using ext2 for /boot rather than
ext3?
no to either
/boot should not be a single partition by itself..
it is part of /bin,
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Jimmy Wu wrote:
Wow, thanks for the many quick responses. I'm doing a group reply
to the list by quoting everyone in one message. Not sure if this is
top-posting, bottom-posting, or conversational-posting, but if this
goes against mailing list etiquette, please tell
hi ya
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
Jimmy Wu wrote:
(1) ext3 mounts and unmounts slowly, resulting in increased boot times.
any journally fs will be slower than non-journaling fs ( ext2, dos, etc )
(2) Neither JFS nor XFS can be made smaller, although they can be
extended if needed.
i
Jimmy Wu wrote:
Wow, thanks for the many quick responses. I'm doing a group reply
to the list by quoting everyone in one message. Not sure if this is
top-posting, bottom-posting, or conversational-posting, but if this
goes against mailing list etiquette, please tell me/flame me gently,
and I
Hello,
I am trying to decide on which file systems to use for a Debian
install on a personal laptop. It's a Thinkpad T61 with one 160 GB HD.
I've looked around on Google, and come up with a lot of frustratingly
conflicting advice. For example, an article from
debian-administration touts XFS as
On 2008-01-18T14:05:25-0800, Alvin Oga wrote:
(8) Is there any advantage to using ext2 for /boot rather than ext3?
no to either
/boot should not be a single partition by itself..
it is part of /bin, /lib, /sbin /etc ... which is the rootfs
even if /boot is fine, if
Jimmy Wu wrote:
Hello,
I am trying to decide on which file systems to use for a Debian
install on a personal laptop. It's a Thinkpad T61 with one 160 GB HD.
I've looked around on Google, and come up with a lot of frustratingly
conflicting advice. For example, an article from
18 matches
Mail list logo
