On Tue, Sep 18, 2001 at 12:48:12PM -0700, Jeffrey W. Baker wrote: > > > On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Mike Fedyk wrote: > > > 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. > > ext3 has the added advantage of converting an existing ext2 filesystem in > place, and allowing your disk to still be mounted by a machine running > ext2. None of the others can do that. >
And we would not expect them to do that either. Would you expect to convert from vfat to ext2/3? You can convert from fat16 to fat28 also. And to ntfs from fat. This seems to be the first main stream example of FS conversion in linux. Mike
