On 07/18/06 05:27:17PM +0200, Erik Mouw wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2006 at 04:15:42PM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > Francesco Pietra <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > The most recent FS is generaly the one with the most unfound bugs left
> > and often a lot of design kinks that remain to be fixed.
> > Something like ext2 on the other hand has all the bugs and kinks
> > worked out over the years and there is very little new code that could
> > go wrong.
> Ext3 should do as well. The same team that maintains ext2 also
> maintains ext3. Ext3 is like ext2, but with journaling and directory
> indexing. Bug fixes from ext3 get backported to ext2.
Ideally yes, but a lot of times bug fixes and other code changes don't get
backported. From what I've seen very few people think "Hmm, I should check
ext2 for that too" when they make a change to ext3. This isn't a knock on
ext3, it's been extremely reliable in the places that I've used it and I
would definitely recommend it over reiserfs any day, I'm just saying that
ext2 and ext3 aren't really the same any more.