Date:Thu, 4 Jul 2019 22:25:11 +0200
From:Rhialto
Message-ID: <20190704202511.gd11...@falu.nl>
| What is "fslevel 5"? fslevel(8) only explains up to level 4. In fact it
| even claims "Note that FFSv2 file systems are always level 4."
The level is a constructed
Date:Wed, 3 Jul 2019 21:26:35 - (UTC)
From:mlel...@serpens.de (Michael van Elst)
Message-ID:
| FFSv1 also has a 32bit (or rather 31bit) limit. Since it counts fragments,
| not physical disk blocks, the effective limit for the filesystem size
| varies
Date:Wed, 3 Jul 2019 19:43:20 +0200
From:tlaro...@polynum.com
Message-ID: <20190703174320.ga7...@polynum.com>
| But if somebody had numbers about tests comparing FFSv1 and FFSv2 and
| the efficiency (for formatting,
FFSv1 pre-allocates (ie: zeroes) all of the
mueller6...@twc.com ("Thomas Mueller") writes:
>I looked using ls -la / and ls -la //root and found
>no .attribute subdirectory. I ran dumpfs to verify whether the file system
>was UFS1 or UFS2.
Have a look at the exattrctl command. It's used to create the attribute
storage.
--
--
from Greg Troxel:
> Saying that "UFS2" does or does not have support does not make senes,
> without saying "UFS2 in FooBSD". As I understand it, in NetBSD, UFS1
> has support and UFS2 doesn't. FreeBSD may well be different. Since
> we have a long tradition of moving code back and forth,
On Wed 03 Jul 2019 at 12:21:39 -0400, Greg Troxel wrote:
> newfs(8) and fsck_ffs(8) explain this, although I can see that it's
> slightly hard to follow. Basically, retrocomputing aside, there is
>
> - UFS1 level 4, which has a "FFSv2-format superblock"
> - UFS2
What is "fslevel 5"?
"Thomas Mueller" writes:
> I remember reading on Haiku web site (haiku-os.org), with reference to
> cross-compiling, that UFS2 supports extended attributes. I also
> checked Wikipedia (Unix File System), and UFS2 supports extended
> attributes.
Saying that "UFS2" does or does not have support
from Michael van Elst:
> tlaro...@polynum.com writes:
> >I guess that my uncertainty about FFSv1 vs FFSv2 comes partly from this
> >confusion between fdisk(8) vs gpt(8) and the 32bits limit and the
> >mention of > 1To in newfs(8) man page.
> FFSv1 also has a 32bit (or rather 31bit) limit. Since
Hello,
On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 09:26:35PM -, Michael van Elst wrote:
> tlaro...@polynum.com writes:
>
> >I guess that my uncertainty about FFSv1 vs FFSv2 comes partly from this
> >confusion between fdisk(8) vs gpt(8) and the 32bits limit and the
> >mention of > 1To in newfs(8) man page.
>
