done on the FR. Therefore, I'll edit the page with opinions are
divided regarding reliability and no objective comparisons yet for
other criteria.
It'd be much easier to just punt on the whole issue and say same rules
apply as for any other Linux system.
party pooper.
Martin Bernreuther wrote:
again (cmp.
http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2009-January/040623.html)...
IMHO, it should be
owner/group concept and permissions (there are even extensions for ACLs) and
linking is a part of a build process (typically after compiling), so maybe
W.Kenworthy wrote:
I have to disagree here - because my own opinion is that ext2/3 are not
the best for every purpose, and are demonstrably a poor choice for OSM
maps on an SD card for instance.
Last I heard reiserfs3 is still being maintained, and it has some real
advantages for OSM maps
On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 09:42 +0100, Fernando Martins wrote:
W.Kenworthy wrote:
I have to disagree here - because my own opinion is that ext2/3 are not
the best for every purpose, and are demonstrably a poor choice for OSM
maps on an SD card for instance.
Last I heard reiserfs3 is still
arne anka wrote:
There is a certain amount of YMMV with file system choices depending on
your usage scenarios, but personally I would really like to use reiserfs
and dump ext2/3 and all the problems they cause on the FR (lost
data/corrupted filesystems, slow performance, ...) that I have.
done on the FR. Therefore, I'll edit the page with opinions are
divided regarding reliability and no objective comparisons yet for
other criteria.
It'd be much easier to just punt on the whole issue and say same rules
apply as for any other Linux system.
Stefan
There is a certain amount of YMMV with file system choices depending on
your usage scenarios, but personally I would really like to use reiserfs
and dump ext2/3 and all the problems they cause on the FR (lost
data/corrupted filesystems, slow performance, ...) that I have.
i, on the other
W.Kenworthy wrote:
I have to disagree here - because my own opinion is that ext2/3 are not
the best for every purpose, and are demonstrably a poor choice for OSM
maps on an SD card for instance.
Last I heard reiserfs3 is still being maintained, and it has some real
advantages for OSM maps
-January/040521.html
I got a new SD card. Which file system is the best?
Short answer: ext3. Other options: ext2, vfat. Don't use wear-aware file
systems like jffs2 and ubifs.
Long answer:
In principle you can use any file system that is supported by the kernel
in your Open Moko, commonly FAT, ext2
systems. Since not many people are recommending reiserfs nowadays due to
lack of maintenance, regardless of being considered better than ext2/3,
ext3 remains as the choice.
it's not only lack of maintenance and reiserfs is not considered to be
better (by whom?)!
the best you could say is,
arne anka wrote:
systems. Since not many people are recommending reiserfs nowadays due to
lack of maintenance, regardless of being considered better than ext2/3,
ext3 remains as the choice.
it's not only lack of maintenance and reiserfs is not considered to be
better (by whom?)!
Hi,
Am Sonntag, 1. Februar 2009 schrieb Fernando Martins:
It is also important to note that ext is faster than FAT (benchmark,
anyone?) but, most importantly, it supports permissions, which FAT
doesn't. Of course, since FR is in general a single user device, the
permissions might be not so
On Sun, 2009-02-01 at 15:03 +0100, arne anka wrote:
systems. Since not many people are recommending reiserfs nowadays due to
lack of maintenance, regardless of being considered better than ext2/3,
ext3 remains as the choice.
it's not only lack of maintenance and reiserfs is not considered
Fernando Martins wrote:
[...]
Anyway, I'm also inclined for FAT, mostly for the simplicity (thus less
susceptibility to corruption) and universality of the fs. I'm just left
wondering about performance, in particular as a storage for maps.
Maps will be read-mostly, right? So ext2 and ext3
Anyway, I'm also inclined for FAT, mostly for the simplicity (thus less
susceptibility to corruption) and universality of the fs. I'm just left
I'd stay away from FAT: its simplicity makes it less susceptible to
software bugs, maybe, but still susceptible to corruption.
The general
Does anyone use PosixOVL on top of VFAT? I know of this because of slax
On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Stefan Monnier
monn...@iro.umontreal.ca wrote:
Anyway, I'm also inclined for FAT, mostly for the simplicity (thus less
susceptibility to corruption) and universality of the fs. I'm just left
William Kenworthy ha scritto:
I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
Using it for OSM maps
BillK
IMHO the best fs for sd is vfat if you don't care about permission, so
if you have to put
Not having the journal imlies a redouced number of write to sd and a
reduced probability to get the data lost.
this discusion has in some extend token place a while ago (community or
support archives should have it ready, look for wear leveling) and it was
widely agreed upon, that with
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi..
I bought a 2GB sd card which came formatted with FAT. Is this a good
option for the sd card or is it advisable to use another fs? I'm using
it for osm maps.
My experience: I had trouble with FAT and OSM maps.. it became read-only
after a
Sean McNeil wrote:
Neither of those filesystems are appropriate for sd cards. They have
wear leveling logic that is not necessary or a good thing as it is
already done in firmware for sd. An efficient journaled filesystem not
designed for memory devices (like ext3) would be best.
A
Pietro m0nt0 Montorfano wrote:
William Kenworthy ha scritto:
I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
Using it for OSM maps
BillK
IMHO the best fs for sd is vfat if you don't care
Fernando Martins ha scritto:
Pietro m0nt0 Montorfano wrote:
William Kenworthy ha scritto:
I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
Using it for OSM maps
BillK
IMHO the best fs for sd
From: Sean McNeil s...@mcneil.com
Date: January 24, 2009 6:32:28 PM PST
To: List for Openmoko community discussion
community@lists.openmoko.org
Subject: Re: which file system for sd card?
Reply-To: List for Openmoko community discussion
community@lists.openmoko.org
thewire wrote
From: thewire li...@w23.ru
Date: January 24, 2009 3:32:54 PM PST
To: List for Openmoko community discussion
community@lists.openmoko.org
Subject: Re: which file system for sd card?
Reply-To: List for Openmoko community discussion
community@lists.openmoko.org
The Digital Pioneer
appreciate feedback from the
list beforehand.
=
I got a new SD card. Which file system is the best?
In general, vfat or ext2 are the most recommended.
Vfat might already be the fs in your card when you got a new one. It has
the advantage of being recognised in many other systems. The data
On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 3:56:26 am Pietro m0nt0 Montorfano wrote:
My point is: journal could avoid errors and prevent some corruption, ok
nothing to say about that.
Journals are really to allow the filesystem to present a consistent view after
a crash or failure and to try and avoid lengthy
On Sun, 2009-01-25 at 15:15 +0100, Fernando Martins wrote:
Pietro m0nt0 Montorfano wrote:
William Kenworthy ha scritto:
I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
Using it for OSM maps
Hello,
Am Sonntag, 25. Januar 2009 schrieb Fernando Martins:
I got a new SD card. Which file system is the best?
In general, vfat or ext2 are the most recommended.
Vfat might already be the fs in your card when you got a new one. It has
the advantage of being recognised in many other
I bought a 2GB sd card which came formatted with FAT. Is this a good
option for the sd card or is it advisable to use another fs? I'm using
it for osm maps.
Regards,
Fernando
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
The only reason they come with FAT is so windoze can use it. That said, I
don't know much about filesystems, but I would generally go with EXT2/3 over
FAT.
--
Thanks,
The Digital Pioneer
___
Openmoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
FAT is used for general purpose. It can be recognized on many different
systems. So if you what to share files between your Windows or Mac desktop
with your Neo using SD card. Then FAT is perfect. If the SD card is only
prepared for your Neo, EXT2/3 is preferred.
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 2:49 AM,
The Digital Pioneer пишет:
The only reason they come with FAT is so windoze can use it. That said,
I don't know much about filesystems, but I would generally go with
EXT2/3 over FAT.
I'm no fs expert either, but i would generally advise to use jffs2 or
ubifs, as they are specially designed for
thewire wrote:
The Digital Pioneer пишет:
The only reason they come with FAT is so windoze can use it. That said,
I don't know much about filesystems, but I would generally go with
EXT2/3 over FAT.
I'm no fs expert either, but i would generally advise to use jffs2 or
ubifs, as
Sean McNeil пишет:
thewire wrote:
The Digital Pioneer пишет:
The only reason they come with FAT is so windoze can use it. That said,
I don't know much about filesystems, but I would generally go with
EXT2/3 over FAT.
I'm no fs expert either, but i would generally advise to use
I found vfat clearly better (less susceptible to corruption) than ext2,
however ext3 is better than vfat, but will still play up at times.
Using it for OSM maps
BillK
On Sat, 2009-01-24 at 19:41 +0100, Fernando Martins wrote:
I bought a 2GB sd card which came formatted with FAT. Is this a good
35 matches
Mail list logo
