Re: HFS+ (MacOS) in contrast to EXT2 (Linux-i386)
On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 10:14:57AM -0700, Laurent de Segur wrote:
> What you are saying about ReiserFS is really unfortunate. When I read the
> archive, there is no question that XFS is a lot more reliable than ReiserFS.
> On the other hand, It seems that the Linux community is promoting heavily
> ReiserFS vs XFS/JFS, and that seems totally contradictory with the feedback
> I got so far.
>
> It's too bad that the XFS module (at least on ppc) is not part of the
> pre-compiled kernel image (ReiserFS is), and that the XFS kernel patches lag
> a few kernel revs behind, making it mostly obsolete by the time you have to
> install it on the latest 2.4 kernel (don't know about 2.2.x but can't afford
> this alternative due to platform support.)
>
I've tried ext3 on x86 and it has been running great for a while for me. I
have yet to test it on ppc, but I will be soon.
I'll report what I find.
Besides ext3, which other journaled FSes support data journaling?
I know not ReiserFS... I think IBM's JFS does. Can XFS?
Mike
Reply to: