Default filesystem - Slackware

This is a discussion on Default filesystem - Slackware ; Hi, I'm currently giving Slack 12.0 a spin. Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS. cheers, Niki...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Default filesystem

  1. Default filesystem

    Hi,

    I'm currently giving Slack 12.0 a spin.

    Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.

    cheers,

    Niki

  2. Re: Default filesystem

    On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:57:10 +0200, Niki Kovacs wrote:

    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm currently giving Slack 12.0 a spin.
    >
    > Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    > now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    > releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.
    >
    > cheers,
    >
    > Niki


    I am not sure that is correct, but in any event, choose the one you need.

    ext3 is satisfactory, especially after a crash -- much faster than ext2.

    I can understand if Reiser is not highlighted since poor Hans is in jail.
    I use Reiserfs fwiw.

    I hope this thread doesn't become a long one about the merits of
    different fs. They all store files.
    --
    Peter

  3. Re: Default filesystem

    Peter wrote:
    >
    > I can understand if Reiser is not highlighted since poor Hans is in jail.


    Why should anyone stop using reiserfs just because Hans is in jail?

    It's interesting that you characterize Hans as "poor Hans". If he's ever
    convicted, will you then refer to him as 'Hans, the murderous bastard'?

    With kind regards

    Chu

  4. Re: Default filesystem

    On 2007-07-12, Niki Kovacs wrote:

    > Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    > now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    > releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.


    I didn't notice it had changed back to the default in 12's setup, but
    I changed back to ext3 after using reiserfs for the last couple years.
    My reason had nothing to do with Hans being in jail, but my suspicion
    reiserfs may possibly be susceptable to data corruption over long
    periods and after crashes/shutdowns. The possibility was raised
    here[1] recently and I have indeed suffered unexplainable corruption
    on my old 10.1 reiserfs box. I have no facts to support my suspicion
    and it may be the real culprit is an aging HDD, but I changed back to
    ext3 nonetheless. Unfortunately, I also changed HDDs, so empirical
    data will not be forthcoming.

    [1] http://tinyurl.com/3cphkd

    nb

  5. Re: Default filesystem

    On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 18:14:12 +0800, ChuMaiFat wrote:

    > It's interesting that you characterize Hans as "poor Hans". If he's ever
    > convicted, will you then refer to him as 'Hans, the murderous bastard'?


    Yes. The same way you are referred to as the "Clueless, ignorant
    Windoze-using droid".

    > With kind regards


    Smeg off.


    --
    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  6. Re: Default filesystem

    On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:58:35 -0500, notbob wrote:

    > On 2007-07-12, Niki Kovacs wrote:
    >
    >> Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    >> now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    >> releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.

    >
    > I didn't notice it had changed back to the default in 12's setup, but I
    > changed back to ext3 after using reiserfs for the last couple years. My
    > reason had nothing to do with Hans being in jail, but my suspicion
    > reiserfs may possibly be susceptable to data corruption over long
    > periods and after crashes/shutdowns. The possibility was raised here[1]
    > recently and I have indeed suffered unexplainable corruption on my old
    > 10.1 reiserfs box. I have no facts to support my suspicion and it may
    > be the real culprit is an aging HDD, but I changed back to ext3
    > nonetheless. Unfortunately, I also changed HDDs, so empirical data will
    > not be forthcoming.


    My experience with reiserfs is also not any good. It is the only
    filesystem in Linux which has consistently been a source of problems, no
    matter what hard drive it was on.


  7. Re: Default filesystem

    On Jul 12, 7:14 am, Harold Weissman wrote:
    > On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 07:58:35 -0500, notbob wrote:
    > > On 2007-07-12, Niki Kovacs wrote:

    >
    > >> Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    > >> now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    > >> releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.

    >
    > > I didn't notice it had changed back to the default in 12's setup, but I
    > > changed back to ext3 after using reiserfs for the last couple years. My
    > > reason had nothing to do with Hans being in jail, but my suspicion
    > > reiserfs may possibly be susceptable to data corruption over long
    > > periods and after crashes/shutdowns. The possibility was raised here[1]
    > > recently and I have indeed suffered unexplainable corruption on my old
    > > 10.1 reiserfs box. I have no facts to support my suspicion and it may
    > > be the real culprit is an aging HDD, but I changed back to ext3
    > > nonetheless. Unfortunately, I also changed HDDs, so empirical data will
    > > not be forthcoming.

    >
    > My experience with reiserfs is also not any good. It is the only
    > filesystem in Linux which has consistently been a source of problems, no
    > matter what hard drive it was on.


    I've had great luck with reiserfs, although, I only use it at home,
    while I use ext3 at work. I've had no problems with reiserfs, while I
    have had a few with ext3 becoming corrupted.

    I need to do some reading on what the status of reiserfs 4 is, I
    believe Hans had released it, and it was trying to make its way into
    the kernel tree, and since then, is Hans arrest.

    Time to go do some reading about that status of reiserfs4.

    Mike


  8. Re: Default filesystem




    notbob wrote:

    >I changed back to ext3 after using reiserfs for the last couple years.
    >My reason had nothing to do with Hans being in jail, but my suspicion
    >reiserfs may possibly be susceptable to data corruption over long
    >periods and after crashes/shutdowns. The possibility was raised
    >here[1] recently and I have indeed suffered unexplainable corruption
    >on my old 10.1 reiserfs box. I have no facts to support my suspicion
    >and it may be the real culprit is an aging HDD, but I changed back to
    >ext3 nonetheless. Unfortunately, I also changed HDDs, so empirical
    >data will not be forthcoming.
    >
    >[1] http://tinyurl.com/3cphkd


    If there is a bug in ReiserFS that causes data corruption,
    I am sure that Hans Reiser will find it and fix it. Oh.
    That's right. Hans Reiser is in jail facing a murder charge
    and doesn't have access to a computer... Maybe Hans being in
    jail is a reason to use EXT3 instead of ReiserFS after all.

    --
    Guy Macon




  9. Re: Default filesystem

    On Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:14:56 +0000, Mike wrote:

    snip....
    >
    > I've had great luck with reiserfs, although, I only use it at home,
    > while I use ext3 at work. I've had no problems with reiserfs, while I
    > have had a few with ext3 becoming corrupted.
    >
    > I need to do some reading on what the status of reiserfs 4 is, I believe
    > Hans had released it, and it was trying to make its way into the kernel
    > tree, and since then, is Hans arrest.
    >
    > Time to go do some reading about that status of reiserfs4.
    >
    > Mike


    R4 had been in testing and was released for public use and comments
    sometime in late 05 or in 06. However, it was never considered production-
    suitable (see namesys.com). I believe there was quite a problem getting
    it into the mainstream kernel although several patchsets did incorporate
    it.

    Problems with R4 I had were, no migration from R3, few bootable CDs cover
    R4, and of course, how can it ever get stable if Hans is in jail? So I
    went back to R3 and am happy I did.

    --
    Peter

  10. Re: Default filesystem

    On 2007-07-12, Guy Macon wrote:

    > and doesn't have access to a computer... Maybe Hans being in
    > jail is a reason to use EXT3 instead of ReiserFS after all.


    I can't say. Maybe. I've heard there is a contingency group, much
    like Slackware.

    It's my impression PV used to live in the SFB, an area heavily
    bombarded by the nightly media with lurid speculations of the HR
    crime. Not so much lately, but you know what I mean. So, if PV is
    still in the area, it may be he just wants to distance himself from
    that particular file system for marketing reasons.

    Yes, I'm just guessing. But, if this is so, may be an indication that
    PV is really sensitive to the market. Time will tell.

    nb





  11. Re: Default filesystem

    Niki Kovacs wrote:
    > Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    > now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    > releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.


    Unless you have a laptop I recommend not using ReiserFS as it has
    problems with it - unrecoverable corruption when power loss happens.
    Here are the details:

    http://swoes.blogspot.com/2006/06/reiserfs-bugs.html


    --
    Milan Babuskov
    http://home.gna.org/vodovod

  12. Re: Default filesystem

    Niki Kovacs wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > I'm currently giving Slack 12.0 a spin.
    >
    > Curious thing: in the installer, the default highlighted filesystem is
    > now... ext3. IIRC, when using a 2.6 kernel in previous Slackware
    > releases, that used to be ReiserFS or XFS.
    >
    > cheers,
    >
    > Niki


    I have used reiser for quite a while without any "known" problems. Then
    I started using JFS. That's worked quite nicely for me. One of the
    advantages of JFS when compared to other file systems on Linux is that
    it consistently seems to win in the low cpu load category. On modern
    hardware that's not too big of a deal. Another advantage is that IBM
    uses JFS on other platforms that could expose weaknesses in the code.

    Although I like JFS I may switch to EXT3 on my notebook since it has a
    way of changing the journal interval (reiser has it too) when the
    computer is running on battery power which potentially could cut down on
    disk spinups. It would be nice if JFS supported that, but AFAIK it
    doesn't. I'll be experimenting with this for a while, since my Slack 12
    on a notebook has only been running for a couple of weeks.

    Regards

+ Reply to Thread