Re: XFS is unsafe (Was: Re: d-i does not show jfs in partition tool)

To: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>
Cc: debian-arm <debian-arm@lists.debian.org>
Subject: Re: XFS is unsafe (Was: Re: d-i does not show jfs in partition tool)
From: Xan <dxpublica@telefonica.net>
Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:45:32 +0200
Message-id: <[🔎] 48C394AC.90103@telefonica.net>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20080906165645.GG23673@deprecation.cyrius.com>
References: <1219424223.11725.11.camel@moria> <48AED93D.6090404@telefonica.net> <1219426136.11725.15.camel@moria> <48AEE71D.8010801@telefonica.net> <1219431354.11725.32.camel@moria> <48B29148.2010508@telefonica.net> <1219665772.4826.5.camel@moria> <48B2C6F0.6010106@telefonica.net> <1219739246.1559.33.camel@moria> <48B413DC.7010207@telefonica.net> <[🔎] 20080906165645.GG23673@deprecation.cyrius.com>

En/na Martin Michlmayr ha escrit:

* Xan <dxpublica@telefonica.net> [2008-08-26 16:31]:

So, it seems that jfs is good. Perhaps you (Martin) could include in
d-i as an option.


I'm uploading new installer kernels for armel right now that contain
JFS.

Thanks a lot, Martin. Maybe you could mark is as "experimental" orsomething like in module selection for non confusing people about stability.


Xan.

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: XFS is unsafe (Was: Re: d-i does not show jfs in partition tool)
  - From: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>

References:
- Re: XFS is unsafe (Was: Re: d-i does not show jfs in partition tool)
  - From: Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>