Bob Raymond wrote: > On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 12:29, Collins wrote: > >>Unlike my experiences with the 2.3.x development series (which >>seemed better and faster than 2.2.x stable series), I have yet to >>read about anything in 2.5.x that makes me want to swim in this >>pond before it is 2.6 or 3.0. Have you found any great benefits? > > > Sound is much better. I'm not sure whether I'm getting slower > performance because of XFS or not, but that code seems to be relatively > volatile right now. Since you're using ext3, I don't see where you'd > have any problems, but I think I'm not going to touch it again until the > XFS code has stabilized a bit more. Others on LKML have reported more > zip, even on 486 25mhz machines with 8 mb and 0 swap, than 2.4.19. > > Bob Raymond > > _______________________________________________
XFS code is pretty stable as is, which is why it was included into the kernel at .39. There is, however, a development tree which will most likely be what's in 2.6. If you're really after cutting edge XFS see the announcement: <quote> Ok so we are making progress toward actually getting a 1.2 release ready. ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/Release-1.2pre1/ Currently the for this pre-release only a single patch'em all patch is available. The command are split up as usual into rpm's src.rpm's and tar balls. We are still chasing several bugs in this code base, they are very obscure end case problems so most people won't hit them. Please pound on, run over, throw things etc. and report problems, success weather conditions. The installer iso is also available. I will install a system that looks and feels similar to a RedHat (tm) 8.0 system. NOTE NOTE NOTE This is probably going to be the only spin of the installer iso, as the amount of effort is not trivial. A few known problems exist and will probably not be fixed unless somebody wants to send in a fix. 1) Grub does not install correctly during the install, anybody wishing to use grub should select lilo initially for the boot loader and them install grub once the system is up. 2) Upgrades on system with labels in the fstab do not work, this is problem with anaconda and is not easily fixed. The workaround for this is to change the fstab to contain the actual device names before attempting the upgrade. 3) The text version of the installer is not able to do partitioning. This is probably a trivial bug in anaconda but we just don't have time to look at it. </quote> -- Andrew Mathews --------------------------------------------------------------------- 12:20pm up 20:22, 2 users, load average: 0.06, 0.07, 0.02 --------------------------------------------------------------------- An ounce of clear truth is worth a pound of obfuscation. _______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
