On 02/02/17 02:58 AM, Ken Heard wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2017-02-02 08:47, Gary Dale wrote:
There shouldn't be any problem with ext4. It's been the Linux
standard for years now. I can't even imagine what the backup issue
would be unless they were trying to make s
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2017-02-03 03:03, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> On 02/02/17 20:58, Ken Heard wrote:
>> I use USB flash drives and 480 GB SanDisk portable drives for
>> some backups. I started by using ext4 on one of the flash drives.
>> The next day I tried to boot t
On 02/02/17 20:58, Ken Heard wrote:
I use USB flash drives and 480 GB SanDisk portable drives for some
backups. I started by using ext4 on one of the flash drives. The next
day I tried to boot the computer, but found that the computer hung.
Only at this point did I find out that those drives are
Roba wrote:
> Is there any difference between ext3 and ext4 in terms of backing up a
> system? I can't recall the details but I run into a backup problem
> once and remember reading that ext4 was under experimentation by the
> backup developers and ext3 was supported fully but not ext4. I am no
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2017-02-02 08:47, Gary Dale wrote:
> There shouldn't be any problem with ext4. It's been the Linux
> standard for years now. I can't even imagine what the backup issue
> would be unless they were trying to make some kind of sparse backup
> using FS
On 01/02/17 07:11 PM, Roba wrote:
Is there any difference between ext3 and ext4 in terms of backing up a
system? I can't recall the details but I run into a backup problem once
and remember reading that ext4 was under experimentation by the backup
developers and ext3 was supported fully but not
Is there any difference between ext3 and ext4 in terms of backing up a
system? I can't recall the details but I run into a backup problem once
and remember reading that ext4 was under experimentation by the backup
developers and ext3 was supported fully but not ext4.
I am not sure if it was clonez
On 01/02/17 03:23 AM, Dennis Wicks wrote:
I am going to install some more disks and I was wondering which file
system to use.
I have several ext? and a few with Reiserfs. Is there a better choice
than Reiser now? Also, is there any way to convert from my existing fs
to the recommended one?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 12:29:03PM +, Andy Smith wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:23:13AM -0600, Dennis Wicks wrote:
> > I have several ext? and a few with Reiserfs. Is there a better choice
> > than Reiser now?
Seconded the gen
Hi Dennis,
On Wed, Feb 01, 2017 at 02:23:13AM -0600, Dennis Wicks wrote:
> I have several ext? and a few with Reiserfs. Is there a better choice
> than Reiser now?
What are your requirements or typical usage?
> Also, is there any way to convert from my existing
> fs to the recommended one?
I do
Dennis Wicks:
>
> I am going to install some more disks and I was wondering which file system
> to use.
Use ext4 unless you have special requirements. I would always use LVM as
well because it makes partitioning a lot easier.
> I have several ext? and a few with Reiserfs. Is there a better choice
On Wednesday, February 1, 2017 1:36:19 AM CET John L. Ries wrote:
> Lately, I've been using ext4, which seems to work quite nicely.
I also stick with ext4, which BTW I think is the default option.
I used to use ReiserFS and liked it, but I don't think much work has been
done on it since Hans Reiser went to jail. Lately, I've been using ext4,
which seems to work quite nicely.
--|
John L. Ries |
Salford Systems |
Phone: (619)543-8880 x107 |
or
I am going to install some more disks and I was wondering
which file system to use.
I have several ext? and a few with Reiserfs. Is there a
better choice than Reiser now? Also, is there any way to
convert from my existing fs to the recommended one?
BTW, I am running "Debian GNU/Linux 8 (jess
14 matches
Mail list logo