[gentoo-dev] reiser-fs

[gentoo-dev] reiser-fs

[M. Zuelsdorff]

What about swapping this discussion to gentoo-user or gentoo-newbie? I would 
expect a developer to track down the bug(s) and post the appropriate patches 
here. Instead of (not) recommending this and that without any details like 
kernel configs, environment, etc. which (maybe) would at least lead to some 
ideas what these trouble makers had in common and the like.

michael

Re: [gentoo-dev] reiser-fs, other fs's and their support.

[Miguel S. Filipe]

M. Zuelsdorff wrote:

>What about swapping this discussion to gentoo-user or gentoo-newbie? I would 
>expect a developer to track down the bug(s) and post the appropriate patches 
>here. Instead of (not) recommending this and that without any details like 
>kernel configs, environment, etc. which (maybe) would at least lead to some 
>ideas what these trouble makers had in common and the like.
>
>michael
>_______________________________________________
>gentoo-dev mailing list
>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
>http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>
>  
>
Has far has I can say, every FS that's out there HAS stability issues..
in my old 486 laptop even ext2 ISN'T capable of NOT failing

I know that reiserfs did caused problems, specially with some kernel 
versions, am I correct?
I also know that ext3 is far from rock...same with jfs and xfs... and 
even the linux kernel didn't helped, with versions that messed up the 
filesystem...

I also believe that everyone could try to defend their favorite... and 
even be relatively sucesseful.

But since this might start to seem like a religous discution with no 
conclusion..

I believe that Gentoo should supply a broad range of filesystem 
supports, and let the user decide what to use.
However, since it's the developers who have to answer to users with fs 
failures, and they are the one's that have all the trouble supporting 
all those fs's, gentoo could have a "favorite" fs, so that would be the 
advisable, and most supported under gentoo.
 After all gentoo is guided for the poweruser, and the poweruser isn't 
supposed to be ignorant when it comes to linux and his core components, 
and in fact the poweruser whant's to use his favorite's core components.
 Mainly because of that, I believe gentoo should NOT disadvise anyone 
from using whatever component they want.

I myself, am one of the many reiserfs users, in 3 computers at home, one 
at the office, and know that my university department has several dozens 
of PC's with reiserfs, working 24/7 with every kind of user (from 
developers to web porn watchers) and knowing the admins, they haven't 
told me any problem with reiserfs yet.

For me, saying that reiserfs, XFS, JFS or ext3 is "production 
environment ready" is a personal judgement, based on our experience, 
knowledge of the fs, and support that is provided in some way.

If a gentoo user can't make his mind about wich one to use, that fact 
that gentoo's favorite and most supported is XFS, should make his mind. 
(and this is what developers want right?)

Also, saying that any of the mentioned before file systems is UNSTABLE I 
believe it to be one overstatement.

thats just my though, the main line is.. make gentoo don't take sides 
and be the more independent possible.

For instance, I don't like rmap VM, for know I prefer aa VM, and because 
of that I use a "home grown" kernel version.... with o(1) scheduler + 
preempt patches ... and in the same line of reason, in the future gentoo 
might advise a user NOT to use some vanilla kernel. I think the most 
gentoo should do is.. to advise the use of the gentoo kernel. More than 
that is intrusive.

Miguel Sousa Filipe
.............
one happy gentoo user from Portugal. (.pt)

p.s.: waiting for a workable alsa + kde ebuilds and gcc 3.1 in gentoo to 
install it in my laptop =). (can't hardly wait)
...gentoo allready replaced debian in the smp workstation..