Jim Michmerhuizen wrote: > I'm building under ubuntu 12.04 installed on a VirtualBox. There are > two partitions, /dev/sda1 for the ubuntu build system, /dev/sda5 for the > target lfs. Both of them are formatted ext4. > > debugfs -R feature /dev/sda5 > > reported extra features: > extent > flex_bg > huge_file > uninit_bg > dir_nlink > extra_isize > > Reluctant to build a whole new e2fsprogs, I consulted /etc/mke2fs.conf, > and it appeared that, at least so far as the ubuntu team is concerned, > the features above differentiate an ext4 from an ext3 filesystem. > > So I reformatted /dev/sda5 as an ext3. 'debugfs' now reports a leaner > feature set for /dev/sda5. It satisfies the constraints of the section > 2.3 note. > > Could I have gone ahead with the ext4 partition and its extra features? > Bruce said, back in February, that ext3/4 shouldn't make a difference. > But doesn't the section 2.3 note imply that it *does* (or at least > *might* ) make a difference?
That section was written some time ago. Since February, I've built LFS on an ext4 partition without issues, but I did use a relatively current e2fsprogs to do the formatting. $ debugfs -R feature /dev/sdc1 debugfs 1.42.5 (29-Jul-2012) Filesystem features: has_journal ext_attr resize_inode dir_index filetype needs_recovery extent flex_bg sparse_super large_file huge_file uninit_bg dir_nlink extra_isize This is an SSD drive formatted as ext4 and mounted noatime. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
