Submitted 24-Jul-00 by Sarang Lakare:
> somethign is better than nothing dosn't work in this world.. if you have
> ReiserFS, it better work... else I don't see any point in including it in
> the kernel.. some distributions like LM itself gives the user the option to
> install ReiserFS in beta.. so thats fine i guess!
>
> its ok to test it on home machines.. including it in the kernel means
> mission critical users would want to try out too.. keeping it out of the
> default kernel will stop those users from using it.. and that i think is
> good. its always good to have the best things in and beta things left out
> or marked "beta" clearly.
>
That is why ReiserFS is not an available option during install unless
you choose an expert install. It is expected that people who select
expert are exactly that: expert.
If you don't know enough to make an informed decision (read: you have
read all of the relevant documentation and are aware of the risks)
about it, you shouldn't use it.
_Most_ of the cases I have heard about Reiser breaking in somebody's
Mandrake box were situations in which they were _trying_ to break it.
And in many of those, the discs lasted (i.e. were recoverable) than an
ext2 fs likely would have been.
For example, one person was intentionally (and repeatedly) cutting
power to his box while performing dozens of parallel compiles. I have
seen ext2 systems die after doing something similar just once.
As far as "its ok to test it on home machines," a journalling
filesystem is convenient for them, but they are generally not equipped
to "test" it. How many home users have the kind of filesystem load
you see on a real file server?
--
_
_|_|_
( ) * Anton Graham
/v\ / <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
/( )X
(m_m) GPG ID: 18F78541
Penguin Powered!
