Re: filesystem Qs

grub doesn't need ext3. I've used it to boot ext2, ext3, xfs, reiser,
fat32 and whatever W2000 uses for its initial boot. I thought it was
ntfs, but that doesn't seem to be supported and I'm still booting fine.
Didn't your Sony laptop use grub? You were dual booting w/ W98 (fat32).

The following from : The grub manual
<http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#Features>

Support multiple filesystem types
    Support multiple filesystem types transparently, plus a useful
    explicit blocklist notation. The currently supported filesystem
    types are BSD FFS, DOS FAT16 and FAT32, Minix fs, Linux ext2fs,
    ReiserFS, JFS, XFS, and VSTa fs. See Filesystem
    <http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#Filesystem>, for
    more information.

Jim

Fielder George Dowding wrote:

>Hi Bryan,
>
>I never use a non-journaling file system anymore. Apparently grub (the
>grand unified boot 'thingy') needs ext3 (which is ext2 with a journal)
>to reliably boot. At least my last dozen or so Debian installs
>complained when I tried to use any other file system for the boot
>partition. I like the reiserfs, but there are those around who swear by
>xfs (the SGI offering). I have used it once, two or three harddisks ago
>(or more). I have not tried jfs (the IBM offering), but I have heard
>that it is solid.
>
>I find the ext2 based file system, which includes ext3, to be a pain
>when it decides to check itself because it has been mounted more than 30
>or so times. I generally shut down my equipment when I am done for the
>session because a) I have four or five here at my home office and I have
>to pay for the electricity, and b) the other three or four are at two
>different offices and it is not good to leave them running and
>unoccupied. So, every three weeks, or so, I get this delay whilst ext2
>is checking itself.
>
>My experience with the reiserfs is pleasant. It formats fast and it
>recovers fast. I cannot say anything about either xfs or jfs, but I hear
>they are fast too. No, I will never, ever, knowingly, use a
>non-journaling file system on one of my computers.
>
>fgd.
>
>bryanm@acsalaska.net wrote:
>
>
>>I'm looking at filesystems to use on a couple new systems, and I came
>>up with some questions for the list:
>>
>>1. Are there any reputable non-journaling filesystems used on Linux
>> these days except for ext2?
>>
>>2. When repairing a filesystem by replaying a journal, does the time
>> it takes depend on the amount of data in the filesystem, or just
>> on the number of files?
>>
>>3. Is there any advantage to journaling filesystems other than the
>> speed of recovery after a crash?
>>
>>I appreciate your collective wisdom.
>>
>>--
>>Bryan Medsker
>>bryanm@acsalaska.net
>>
>>---------
>>To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
>>with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Type: text/x-vcard
-- File: Jim.vcf

---------
To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org>
with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
Received on Fri Dec 2 11:06:07 2005