Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On 15 September 2016 01:01:02 CEST, Rich Freeman wrote: >If you're using an initramfs the kernel will not mount anything at any >time unless some process with sufficient capabilities asks it to. The >initramfs typically mounts the root partition, and then execs init. >Anything beyond that is done

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:03 PM, Holger Wünsche wrote: > > I think the problem might be fstab or the point, where the initramfs gives > controll to the kernel. The initramfs doesn't ever really give control to the kernel (well, at least not any more than any process does anytime it invokes a sys

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On 14 September 2016 22:42:06 CEST, Rich Freeman wrote: >On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Holger Wünsche > wrote: >> I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: >> - the root-partition is read-only but shown as read-write when >directly booting into gentoo, >> - the type of the root-partition

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:31 PM, Holger Wünsche wrote: > So /proc/mounts is the file giving the correct information. Your issue is that /etc/mtab is stale. Recent versions of OpenRC recommend that you replace it with a symlink to /proc/self/mounts.

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Holger Wünsche wrote: > I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: > - the root-partition is read-only but shown as read-write when directly > booting into gentoo, > - the type of the root-partition is "none", > - when only mounting the root-partition using a

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

>Sorry, might be /proc/mounts. # cat /proc/mounts proc /proc proc rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0 udev /devdevtmpfs rw,nosuid,nodev,noexec,relatime 0 0 devpts/dev/ptsdevptsrw,nosuid,relatime,gid=5,mode=620 0 0 sysfs

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On September 14, 2016 8:10:03 PM GMT+02:00, "Holger Wünsche" wrote: >On 14 September 2016 19:04:23 CEST, "J. Roeleveld" >wrote: >>On September 14, 2016 6:18:52 PM GMT+02:00, "Holger Wünsche" >> wrote: >>>I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: >>>[…] >> >>Does the output of >># cat /proc

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On 14 September 2016 19:04:23 CEST, "J. Roeleveld" wrote: >On September 14, 2016 6:18:52 PM GMT+02:00, "Holger Wünsche" > wrote: >>I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: >>[…] > >Does the output of ># cat /proc/mtab >Change after remounting rw? Since I can not find /proc/mtab I assume yo

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

On September 14, 2016 6:18:52 PM GMT+02:00, "Holger Wünsche" wrote: >I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: >- the root-partition is read-only but shown as read-write when directly >booting into gentoo, >- the type of the root-partition is "none", >- when only mounting the root-partition

[gentoo-user] ext4 root-partition mounted read-only as "type none"

I installed gentoo bun ran into some problems: - the root-partition is read-only but shown as read-write when directly booting into gentoo, - the type of the root-partition is "none", - when only mounting the root-partition using a gentoo live-cd all other partitions are shown as mounted too and

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inline data

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote: > My question would be: Will it introduce a significant advantage to my > situation, so much so that I'm willing to live with the obvious drawbacks? Here are some benchmarks: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.ext4/34290

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inline data

On Mar 29, 2013 8:49 PM, "Florian Philipp" wrote: > > Hi list! > > I noticed that beginning with kernel 3.8, ext4 can store small files > entirely inside the inode. But I couldn't find much additional information: > > - Is the improvement automatically enabled? > > - Is the change backwards compat

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inline data

On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Florian Philipp wrote: > Hi list! > > I noticed that beginning with kernel 3.8, ext4 can store small files > entirely inside the inode. But I couldn't find much additional information: > > - Is the improvement automatically enabled? I don't believe so. I think you

[gentoo-user] ext4 inline data

Hi list! I noticed that beginning with kernel 3.8, ext4 can store small files entirely inside the inode. But I couldn't find much additional information: - Is the improvement automatically enabled? - Is the change backwards compatible? Can I still read such files with kernel 3.7? - Can current

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 problem and disk access

2012/12/9 Andre Goessel > Moin, > > On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 03:36:29PM +0100, Jacques Montier wrote: > > As soon as i mount an ext4 partition on my second 1To HDD, the hard drive > > is always working (read/write) every second (even when doing nothing). > > > > This problem appears only with /dev

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 problem and disk access

Moin, On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 03:36:29PM +0100, Jacques Montier wrote: > As soon as i mount an ext4 partition on my second 1To HDD, the hard drive > is always working (read/write) every second (even when doing nothing). > > This problem appears only with /dev/sda5 and /dev/sda6 and stops when > u

[gentoo-user] Ext4 problem and disk access

Hi, As soon as i mount an ext4 partition on my second 1To HDD, the hard drive is always working (read/write) every second (even when doing nothing). Here is my fstab : sdb is a SSD and sda HDD. # SSD /dev/sdb1 /bootext2noatime,discard 1 2 /dev/sdb2 /

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On 13.12.2011 01:44, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > On my system, /usr/portage currently contains 127000 files. But for reason of > increased performance I put it into a squashfs file. (There was a nice howto > on this ML some months ago). You could try that, which will free those inodes > up and id

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On 12/12/2011 06:15 AM, Daniel Troeder wrote: $ fsck -vf /dev/sda5 [..] 655360 inodes used (100.00%) [..] $ find /gentoo -xdev | wc -l 655338 That's really disappointing. I was using reiser3fs and XFS before, and they didn't have that kind of limitation... Uhm... not meant as a rant - I lik

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 12:15:52PM +0100, Daniel Troeder wrote: > I have an ext4-filesystem that contains /usr/src, the /usr/portage and > /var/cache/edb. It previously also contained /var/db/pkg, but I had to > move that some weeks ago, because the fs was "full". Now it's "full" > again, though i

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On 12.12.2011 15:54, Alex Schuster wrote: > Joseph writes: >> That is scary. I just install new HD with 2TB capacity and ext4 that is >> 2% full and: >> $ find /home/joseph/ -xdev | wc -l >> shows: 169977 that is 26% full. > No, that is 26% of the number of total inodes _Daniel_ has on his small

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

Joseph writes: > On 12/12/11 12:15, Daniel Troeder wrote: > >Hello :) > > > >I have an ext4-filesystem that contains /usr/src, the /usr/portage and > >/var/cache/edb. It previously also contained /var/db/pkg, but I had to > >move that some weeks ago, because the fs was "full". Now it's "full" > >a

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On Dec 12, 2011 9:39 PM, "Joseph" wrote: > > Quick googling around indicates that JFS, or XFS don't have these limitation. > -quote > Many computer programs used by system administrators in UNIX operating systems often designate files with inode numbers. Examples include popular disk i

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

Quick googling around indicates that JFS, or XFS don't have these limitation. -quote Many computer programs used by system administrators in UNIX operating systems often designate files with inode numbers. Examples include popular disk integrity checking utilities such as the fsck or

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

On 12/12/11 12:15, Daniel Troeder wrote: Hello :) I have an ext4-filesystem that contains /usr/src, the /usr/portage and /var/cache/edb. It previously also contained /var/db/pkg, but I had to move that some weeks ago, because the fs was "full". Now it's "full" again, though it has free blocks. B

[gentoo-user] ext4 - fill_buffer on unknown block out of range

ext4: "fill_buffer on unknown block out of range" I have seen a number of these appearing in my dmesg recently for a new-ish external disk. I'm afraid that it's a paraphrase, as I am away from the machine at present. ckfs.ext4 -f comes back clean and smartmontools reports nothing out of the ord

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

Daniel Troeder writes: > I have an ext4-filesystem that contains /usr/src, the /usr/portage and > /var/cache/edb. It previously also contained /var/db/pkg, but I had to > move that some weeks ago, because the fs was "full". Now it's "full" > again, though it has free blocks. But no inodes are left

[gentoo-user] ext4 inode limit reached

Hello :) I have an ext4-filesystem that contains /usr/src, the /usr/portage and /var/cache/edb. It previously also contained /var/db/pkg, but I had to move that some weeks ago, because the fs was "full". Now it's "full" again, though it has free blocks. But no inodes are left: $ fsck -vf /dev/sda

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 08:37:24 + Alan Mackenzie wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:26:50PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > > > ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain > > feature (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility > > but you are highly, highly unlik

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Nov 9, 2011 5:02 PM, "Neil Bothwick" wrote: > > On Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:44:00 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > > Anyways, back to topic: I experiment a lot with the kernels, so I > > timestamp them all, and my grub menu lists all kernels found in /boot, > > complete with their respective timestamps

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Wed, 9 Nov 2011 09:44:00 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > Anyways, back to topic: I experiment a lot with the kernels, so I > timestamp them all, and my grub menu lists all kernels found in /boot, > complete with their respective timestamps. The kernel build scripts can do this for you automatical

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 12:22, wrote: >> I call it "pepo's kernel factory". pfk, for short :-} >> > (and it's obvious that not yet having my first cup of coffee for the day > does wonders to my spelling ability) > > But, for some reason, I like pfk much better than pkf. Maybe because it > types a

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

> I call it "pepo's kernel factory". pfk, for short :-}>(and it's obvious that not yet having my first cup of coffee for the day does wonders to my spelling ability)But, for some reason, I like pfk much better than pkf. Maybe because it types a little faster! Or maybe your first coffee wasn't coffe

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Nov 9, 2011 11:16 AM, "Pandu Poluan" wrote: > > > On Nov 9, 2011 11:02 AM, wrote: > > > > I have a script that does the menuconfig + diff .config + make + > > install (including kernel copying to /boot, automagically mounting > > /boot if needed), so I can get away with noauto ;-) > > Oh, and

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Nov 9, 2011 11:02 AM, wrote: > > I have a script that does the menuconfig + diff .config + make + > install (including kernel copying to /boot, automagically mounting > /boot if needed), so I can get away with noauto ;-) > Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D > > > Oh, you use genk

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

I have a script that does the menuconfig + diff .config + make + install (including kernel copying to /boot, automagically mounting /boot if needed), so I can get away with noauto ;-) Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D Oh, you use genkernel, too?:-}

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Nov 9, 2011 6:03 AM, "Paul Hartman" wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sebastian Beßler > wrote: > > Am 08.11.2011 14:11, schrieb Pandu Poluan: > > > >> Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D > > > > > > Why modify grub.cfg? > > > > I have symlinks in /boot > > > > vmlinuz -

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: >Leaving /boot unmounted invites the inevitable error of forgetting to >mount it before installing a new kernel. I prefer to mount it ro, that >way its contents are available, protected from accidental overwriting and >it shouts at you if you fo

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sebastian Beßler wrote: > Am 08.11.2011 14:11, schrieb Pandu Poluan: > >> Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D > > > Why modify grub.cfg? > > I have symlinks in /boot > > vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-3.1.0-gentoo > and > vmlinuz.old -> vmlinuz-3.1.0-rc6-00105-g27

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Am 08.11.2011 14:11, schrieb Pandu Poluan: > Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D Why modify grub.cfg? I have symlinks in /boot vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-3.1.0-gentoo and vmlinuz.old -> vmlinuz-3.1.0-rc6-00105-g279b1e0 who automagic get updated when ever I run make install. The corresp

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Hi Jarry, ext2 abd don't auto mount boot in boot :) -- -:- *David Guillermo* *Blog *: j0d3 *Twitter *: j0d3 *CPU** * : AMD Phenom(tm) II X2 555 Processor 2 Cores OS* : Gentoo Base System GNU/Linux

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 15:52:54 +, Stroller wrote: > I've never used sleep / hibernate on Linux, but if it requires /boot > then mount it read-only, as suggested by Neil Bothwick for other > reasons. Sleep doesn't need access to /boot, the bootloader loads the kernel from the boot partition in th

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On 8 November 2011, at 08:37, Alan Mackenzie wrote: > ... >> The benefits of ext3/4 are irrelevant for /boot anyway - that >> filesystem is write-seldom, read ever so slightly more often. > > Really? I put my PC into power saving mode before going to bed each > evening. The PC needs to read /bo

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Pandu Poluan wrote: I have a script that does the menuconfig + diff .config + make + install (including kernel copying to /boot, automagically mounting /boot if needed), so I can get away with noauto ;-) Oh, and it also auto-modifies grub.cfg for me :-D Rgds, Smarty pants. :-P Dale :-) :

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 19:35, Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 18:15:06 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > >> > Me, I have always put ext2 on /boot.  I just don't see much need in >> > anything fancy for something that is used so seldom plus everything is >> > likely stored somewhere else anywa

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 18:15:06 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > > Me, I have always put ext2 on /boot. I just don't see much need in > > anything fancy for something that is used so seldom plus everything is > > likely stored somewhere else anyway. The kernel should be in the > > kernel source direct

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Nov 8, 2011 5:03 PM, "Dale" wrote: > > Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:26:50PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> >>> ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature >>> (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility but you are >>> highly, h

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Alan Mackenzie wrote: On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:26:50PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility but you are highly, highly unlikely to ever do that on /boot. The benefits of ext

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 09:26:50PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature > (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility but you are > highly, highly unlikely to ever do that on /boot. > The benefits of ext3/4 are irreleva

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On 2011-11-07 19:29, Jarry wrote: > just out of curiosity: is it possible to use ext4/ext3 > filesystem even for separate /boot partition? I've been using ext4 for quite a while as a /boot partition. One of the "features" of ext4 is that you can use it without a journal (while still using extents

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Stroller wrote: > On 7 November 2011, at 19:32, Michael Mol wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Alan McKinnon >> wrote: >>> ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature >>> (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility b

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On 7 November 2011, at 19:32, Michael Mol wrote: > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >> ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature >> (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility but you are >> highly, highly unlikely to ever do that on

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Jarry writes: > just out of curiosity: is it possible to use ext4/ext3 > filesystem even for separate /boot partition? Yes. But a separate /boot partition is small, it is seldomly being written to, it is often unmounted anyway, and a fsck is very fast on such a small partition. So there is not mu

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: > ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature > (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility but you are > highly, highly unlikely to ever do that on /boot. "Extents," I believe. But I don't know exactly

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:29:06 +0100 Jarry wrote: > Hi, > just out of curiosity: is it possible to use ext4/ext3 > filesystem even for separate /boot partition? Yes. ext2/3/4 are all backwards compatible. ext4 does have a certain feature (I forget what) that once used breaks this compatibility bu

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

On Monday 07 November 2011 19:29:06 Jarry wrote: > Hi, > just out of curiosity: is it possible to use ext4/ext3 > filesystem even for separate /boot partition? > > For /boot I'm still using ext2, but a friend of mine > is just doing installation and asked me what filesystem > he should use, so I t

[gentoo-user] ext4/ext3 for /boot?

Hi, just out of curiosity: is it possible to use ext4/ext3 filesystem even for separate /boot partition? For /boot I'm still using ext2, but a friend of mine is just doing installation and asked me what filesystem he should use, so I told him not to complicate things and simply use ext4 for all.

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 reserved space and defragmentation?

On Sunday 27 June 2010 10:27:13 Florian Philipp wrote: > Besides, reserving some space for root can save your rear-end in case > some user fills up your root partition. As long as root's processes > still have a bit of disk space available, he can still log in and clean > up the mess. > > I agree

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 reserved space and defragmentation?

Stroller wrote: I'm pretty sure that just means that Linux will try to put files in contiguous sectors, so they're not fragmented, and that as you run out of space it's generally harder to do that. But I would imagine this is particularly the case with the occasional large file on a typical

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 reserved space and defragmentation?

On 27 Jun 2010, at 08:52, Shaochun Wang wrote: ... "Reserving some number of filesystem blocks for use by privileged processes is done to avoid filesystem fragmentation" It means that filesystem defragmentation need such reserved blocks to work properly, am I right? If so, c

Re: [gentoo-user] ext4 reserved space and defragmentation?

Am 27.06.2010 09:52, schrieb Shaochun Wang: > Hi: > > I want to tune my ext4 filesystem of NAS data partition to free its > reserved space by using "tune2fs -m0 ". By reading the > manual of tune2fs, I observed the following words: > > "Reserving some number of filesystem blocks for use by

[gentoo-user] ext4 reserved space and defragmentation?

Hi: I want to tune my ext4 filesystem of NAS data partition to free its reserved space by using "tune2fs -m0 ". By reading the manual of tune2fs, I observed the following words: "Reserving some number of filesystem blocks for use by privileged processes is done to avoid filesystem

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

On Sonntag 15 Februar 2009, Jesús Guerrero wrote: > El Dom, 15 de Febrero de 2009, 16:59, Volker Armin Hemmann escribió: > > On Montag 02 Februar 2009, Stroller wrote: > > > > the best thing would be to wait for another year before you even think > > about touching that mess. > > If by "that mess"

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

El Dom, 15 de Febrero de 2009, 16:59, Volker Armin Hemmann escribió: > On Montag 02 Februar 2009, Stroller wrote: > > the best thing would be to wait for another year before you even think > about touching that mess. If by "that mess" you mean ext4, you should know that it's just as stable as ext3

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

On Montag 02 Februar 2009, Stroller wrote: > For more funroll-loopiness I contemplate using ext4 for the new system > I'm about to install. > > Anyone know of any LiveCDs that would support this? > > I _think_ it should be just a case of untarring the stage 3, chrooting > in, updating everything to

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

Am Montag, 2. Februar 2009 06:14:17 schrieb Stroller: > Hence I'd be worrying about   > incompatibilities when chrooting in, if I used a non-Gentoo one. When you're chrooted, you _are_ in a Gentoo system. It doesn't matter what system you used to unpack that stage tarball before. I use GRML for

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

Stroller wrote: > For more funroll-loopiness I contemplate using ext4 for the new system > I'm about to install. > > Anyone know of any LiveCDs that would support this? > > I _think_ it should be just a case of untarring the stage 3, chrooting > in, updating everything to latest & reboot. As long a

[gentoo-user] Ext4 for a new installation?

For more funroll-loopiness I contemplate using ext4 for the new system I'm about to install. Anyone know of any LiveCDs that would support this? I _think_ it should be just a case of untarring the stage 3, chrooting in, updating everything to latest & reboot. As long as I use 2.6.28 when I

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 another thread

Am Freitag, 30. Januar 2009 19:49:33 schrieb Harry Putnam: > I didn't want to derail the existing thread discussing ext4 with this > angle ... I'm guessing there may be comments that will not be helpful > to that OP. > > I'm wondering what people running ext4 are seeing in practice that > makes it

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 another thread

On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 12:49 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: > I didn't want to derail the existing thread discussing ext4 with this > angle ... I'm guessing there may be comments that will not be helpful > to that OP. > > I'm wondering what people running ext4 are seeing in practice that > makes it bet

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 another thread

On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: > I didn't want to derail the existing thread discussing ext4 with this > angle ... I'm guessing there may be comments that will not be helpful > to that OP. > > I'm wondering what people running ext4 are seeing in practice that > makes it bett

[gentoo-user] Ext4 another thread

I didn't want to derail the existing thread discussing ext4 with this angle ... I'm guessing there may be comments that will not be helpful to that OP. I'm wondering what people running ext4 are seeing in practice that makes it better than ext3 or reiserfs? Is it safer journalling? Faster read/wri

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

This One Time, at Band Camp, Florian Philipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 06:22:13PM +0100: > On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 06:33 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > > > it's done, thanks, BTW what's your home partition FS? your choice is > > > > ext3 or reiserFS?? > > > I use reise

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 06:33 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > > it's done, thanks, BTW what's your home partition FS? your choice is > > > ext3 or reiserFS?? > > > > I use reiserfs3.6 without notail but that doesn't mean that it would be > > a good choice for you. I'm on laptop and disk space e

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

This One Time, at Band Camp, Peter Humphrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 10:35:18AM +: > On Saturday 16 February 2008 05:33:43 Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > Thank you for your detailed answer it helped a lot > (Why was it necessary to quote the whole of it again?) > > plea

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Saturday 16 February 2008 05:33:43 Wael Nasreddine wrote: > Thank you for your detailed answer it helped a lot (Why was it necessary to quote the whole of it again?) > please take a look at the file attached... and if you have any more > suggestions please do tell me. Just a tiny point: you

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

This One Time, at Band Camp, Florian Philipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 01:50:04AM +0100: > On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 00:32 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > > To your filesystem scheme: Why do you use xfs for usr? AFAIK XFS is good > > > at write speed but not worth the trou

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

I personally prefer JFS to XFS and have used it for years on my servers and laptop with no problem other than hardware errors (and if the hardware fails the fs will not help you). I had system board problems in the laptop and a bad RAID controller in the server this last year :(. Other than that

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Wear leveling. Second UFD for occasional backup. Am I missing something, or does Portage only *write* to the database when you're [em,un]merging? If so, I don't see that there's much to worry about, even if you *are* running pure ~x86, and using overlays, like I am. The only real drawback I see

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Sat, 2008-02-16 at 00:32 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > > To your filesystem scheme: Why do you use xfs for usr? AFAIK XFS is good > > at write speed but not worth the trouble when reading data and data in > > usr is usually written once, updated every few months and read many > > times a

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

This One Time, at Band Camp, Florian Philipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:24:55PM +0100: > On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 21:05 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > > Currently I have 2 partitions, a root and home partition, fortunately > > on LVM array, I was thinking of splitting them

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Alois Hammer wrote: Suggestion: put your Portage and database trees on flash storage. There is no way I would do that or recommend it to anyone. Those devices have a very, very short life if written to frequently. Portage isn't a big problem because an emerge --sync will restore it - but data

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 21:05 +0100, Wael Nasreddine wrote: > Currently I have 2 partitions, a root and home partition, fortunately > on LVM array, I was thinking of splitting them to "/, /usr, /var, /home, > /usr/portage, /mnt/storage" the latter is to be used for Mp3z (around > 12000) and movies..

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Suggestion: put your Portage and database trees on flash storage. I'd go with one of two routes: a fast USB stick or a quality CompactFlash card. At the moment, the one place I know of to get a quality CF card is NewEgg: they're selling a couple of "266x" CF4-compliant cards, Transcend-branded.

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Friday 15 February 2008 03:05:13 pm Wael Nasreddine wrote: > Hey guys, > > Currently I have 2 partitions, a root and home partition, fortunately > on LVM array, I was thinking of splitting them to "/, /usr, /var, /home, > /usr/portage, /mnt/storage" the latter is to be used for Mp3z (around > 12

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

This One Time, at Band Camp, Dale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said, On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:17:11AM -0600: > Aaron Clark wrote: >> Dale wrote: >>> Little addition to XFS, I tried it once a while ago. Every time the >>> power failed, it would never boot again. I can say from personal >>> experienc

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008, Uwe Thiem wrote: > Second, no journalled filesystem in the whole wide world can prevent > occurences of inconsisteny in case of a power cut. None, try as they > might. This is correct. > If the journal change still resides in the > harddrive cache while your power cut occu

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Friday 15 February 2008, Strong Cypher wrote: > Ok guy thanks for answer ... > For my use, mix of ext2/ext3 in partition (lvm) and sparse file could > speed up my system ... > I think it could not at the same point of reiser4 but support in > case of crash could really be better ... Assuming y

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Friday 15 February 2008, Dale wrote: > Little addition to XFS, I tried it once a while ago. Every time the > power failed, it would never boot again. I can say from personal > experience and from what I have read from others, if you plan to use > XFS, have a good UPS hooked up. It does not l

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Friday 15 February 2008, Aaron Clark wrote: > xfs: high performance, especially when dealing with many large or > small files; Gets along very well with raid arrays. Noticeably > higher cpu usage than ext3/jfs. IIRC, it aggressively caches its > writes so there is a slight possibility of data

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Ok guy thanks for answer ... For my use, mix of ext2/ext3 in partition (lvm) and sparse file could speed up my system ... I think it could not at the same point of reiser4 but support in case of crash could really be better ... Thanks for answer It's not easy to create filesystem that's is perfe

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Aaron Clark wrote: Dale wrote: Little addition to XFS, I tried it once a while ago. Every time the power failed, it would never boot again. I can say from personal experience and from what I have read from others, if you plan to use XFS, have a good UPS hooked up. It does not like power

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Dale wrote: Little addition to XFS, I tried it once a while ago. Every time the power failed, it would never boot again. I can say from personal experience and from what I have read from others, if you plan to use XFS, have a good UPS hooked up. It does not like power failures at all. Y

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Aaron Clark wrote: Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Freitag, 15. Februar 2008 schrieb ext Strong Cypher: For exemple , with reiser4 the portage directory don't take a lot of space, and so read it it's really fast... The same is true for reiser3. I want a alternative Well, there are plenty: xfs,

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Dirk Heinrichs wrote: Am Freitag, 15. Februar 2008 schrieb ext Strong Cypher: For exemple , with reiser4 the portage directory don't take a lot of space, and so read it it's really fast... The same is true for reiser3. I want a alternative Well, there are plenty: xfs, jfs, ... Of the cu

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

Am Freitag, 15. Februar 2008 schrieb ext Strong Cypher: > Is they a good fs that is extremly adapted to gentoo system (portage ...) Huh. Why should somebody write a filesystem with Gentoo portage in mind? > Is they fs that support gzip like reiser4 do ? See http://parallel.vub.ac.be/~johan/comp

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:36:25 +0100, Strong Cypher wrote: > For exemple , with reiser4 the portage directory don't take a lot of > space, and so read it it's really fast... You could use a file, like this, then put ext2 on it. http://gentoo-wiki.com/TIP_Speeding_up_portage#Make_A_Sparse_File_to_c

Re: [gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 14:36 +0100, Strong Cypher wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hi, > > I'm looking for an alternative to ext2/3. > > I have put reiser3/4 out because of project seems to be off now ... or > not really active > > I really want an active project. >

[gentoo-user] Ext4 status - Alternative to ext2/3 for gentoo portage and more

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, I'm looking for an alternative to ext2/3. I have put reiser3/4 out because of project seems to be off now ... or not really active I really want an active project. Is they a good fs that is extremly adapted to gentoo system (portage ...) Is th

Re: [gentoo-user] EXt4

Dale wrote: I don't know what "extents" are but I think I will pass for a while longer. Make sure this is going to work right. I have heard that the original developer is in jail or going to be soon or something. I hope someone takes the project over since it sounds like a good file system.

  1   2   >