> and when i think about it all features and messages i get implies that fsck is > "normal". other than mounting a FS in 2 places (and other stuff like > that) i do not expect FS corruption ever. > all i am trying to say is that i expected more of linux and it looks > different.
Linux is pretty close to state of the art -- *for the Unix world.* AIX, HP-UX and Solaris are not much (if any) better. Tandems are better -- but they're not mainstream Unix *at all* and they're *really* weird. Linux isn't (and won't ever be) as reliable as z/OS, and it won't progress in that direction(at least for a very, very long time) until we start demanding very detailed instrumentation capabilities that it took z/OS more than 40 years to acquire. We're dealing with different design points, and at the moment, "good enough" is exactly that. As I commented in my other note (and others agreed), the corruption you're seeing is not normal to Linux; it's something going on in your environment that is doing something behind Linux' back. I'd concentrate your effort on killing that problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For more information on Linux on System z, visit http://wiki.linuxvm.org/
