On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:17:43 -0400 Phillip Susi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Scott Kitterman wrote: >> ReiserFS is effectively unmaintained. I've switched from ReiserFS to Ext3 for >> my installs too. While it works well now, bitrot seems inevitable. >> >> Scott K >> >> Note: This has nothing to do with an legal issues the developers have. The >> Reiser devs have been focused on ResierFS4 for quite some time. > >The point though, is still valid; reiserfs doesn't bother forcing a disk >check every n mounts, so why does ext3 still do this? I think these >days the kernel is bug free enough and hardware is generally reliable >enough that we can drop the forced fsck by default. > Dunno. I was just answering your "Why not ReiserFS?" question.
Scott K -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
