> Stefan:
> The original post for this thread was a user asking whether to use ext2
> or ext3 on a removable USB HD.
I know. And I strongly recommend ext3 over ext2 for such a use, for the
reasons explained. Feel free to disagree. But the fact is that ext3
was specifically designed to be "always consistent", so that any
unexpected interruption (power failure, OS crash, USB unplug, you name
it) should not suffer from data loss other than the data that was being
written (or to be written).
> Some people replying to the thread quoted bits and pieces of the thread
> and replied to those pieces. This causes confusion and leads to off
> topic discussions. As in this case.
It does seem on-topic, since it goes to the core of the difference
between ext2 and ext3 (reliability).
> There are currently other posters arguing about top-posting,
> bottom-posting and inline-posting. With some saying they will do what
> they want regardless. This is nuts!
Yes, it is. AFAICT, I'm not to blame for that, I've stayed pretty
focused on the topic at hand "ext3 vs ext2".
Stefan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
