[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: ReiserFS on blank hard drive



On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 03:43:37PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
> 
> you are looking for more reliability and stability, that is not
> something you can really expect from any of the journalling
> filesystems quite yet.  yes yes some people love to say IWFM, but
> there are plenty of others with horror stories too. 
 I think that Ethan is a bit generalizing this time. OK reiserfs might not be
 the best choice, ext3 is not here yet.. But there is also XFS and i think
 that it's 10 years or so of developement should be taken under consideration
 (i don't know how long it's been developed i just remeber some saying
 something about 10 years). XFS 1.0 is out there and it integrates and
 compiles cleanly (at least with APUS tree which is somewhat based on BK i
 think). All the tools are there and since 1.2.5 work on PPC too. Just give
 it a try =o)) Patching kernel source with XFS is not hard =o) 
 Right now i'm using both XFS and reiserfs (each on partition around 7g) i
 had one crash so far and was really amazed (fscking these partitions under
 ext2 always took ages.. my Amiga has only PIO-0 mode IDE interface...)
> 
> i would suggest splitting up your partitioning.  that is really the
> best thing you can do.  your / should be 64MB, have a seperate /tmp,
 spliting up partitions is always best thing... regardles of filesystem in
 use.. 
> /usr, /var, /home and maybe /usr/local if you use it alot.  keep /usr
 i would split /usr/src (if ones is planning lots of (re)compilation)

as for making apt to remount rw before and ro after upgrading put this

DPkg::Pre-Invoke {"mount -o remount,rw /usr";};
DPkg::Post-Invoke {"mount -o remount,ro /usr";};
DPkg::RunDirectory "/"; 

in /etc/apt/apt.conf or put it in some file in /etc/apt/apt.conf.d

-- 
 Robert Ramiega | jedi@plukwa.net  IRC: _Jedi_ | Do not underestimate 
 UIN: 13201047  | http://www.plukwa.net/       | the power of  Source

Attachment: pgpeFkaXiwZfA.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: