Re: Archive is moving to auric / Incoming disabled

[Brian May <bam@debian.org>]

>>>>> "Marek" == Marek Habersack <grendel@vip.net.pl> writes:

    Marek> ** On May 13, Mike Bilow scribbled:
    >> On 2000-05-12 at 12:46 +0200, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
    >> 
    >> > It's also amazing that reiserfsck is still useless and the
    >> 2.3.x > version of it still doesn't grok the 2.2.x
    >> diskformat. I really > don't think we should use it for our
    >> archive.  > > That just in case someone was going to suggest
    >> that :)
    >> 
    >> How about ext3, then?  :)
    Marek> It's even less usable right now :(, same with XFS :(

Could somebody please tell me what the difference is between

- reiserfs

- ext3

- xfs (I have never heard of this one before)


So far all I know is that they are all enhanced file systems that aim
to do better then EXT2.

So, from that above system:

- which ones support ACLs (I heard something about EXT2 supporting
ACLs, or am I mistaken)?

- support for capabilities (see
http://www.eros-os.org/faq/basics.html#whatis-eros for details on what
I mean here)? This looks like (to me) it might be more important then
ACLs, but may require changing a lot more then just the file system.

- which ones don't require file system checking on startup? How reliable
is this?

- what about performance issues?

- are atomic transactions supported?

I think this is a summary of important issues I have heard of
surrounding file systems. I might have missed other points.

At the moment I am more interested in the aims of each project, as I
realize that they are still under development.
-- 
Brian May <bam@debian.org>