On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 07:24:10PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> As I understand, FFS sits on top of UFS. We migrated from UFS1 to UFS2
> some time ago (remeber the thing about the superblock that was
> converted?), and now we can have FFS v1 or FFS v2 over UFS2. You choose
> FFS v2 by formattin
>> What is the difference between UFS1 and UFS2, and what is the
>> difference between FFS v1 and FFS v2?
> As I understand, FFS sits on top of UFS.
That could be part of my confusion, then. Speaking strictly from a
personal-experience historical perspective, FFS was the Berkeley "Fast
File Syste
der Mouse wrote:
> What is the difference between UFS1 and UFS2, and what is the
> difference between FFS v1 and FFS v2?
As I understand, FFS sits on top of UFS. We migrated from UFS1 to UFS2
some time ago (remeber the thing about the superblock that was
converted?), and now we can have FFS v1 o
On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 10:37:58AM -0400, der Mouse wrote:
> >> ffsv1 or v2? [...]
> > I suspect this is not about UFS1 vs UFS2 but FFS1 (as obtained by
> > newfs without -O) vs FFS v2 (as obtained by newffs -O 2).
>
> Okay, now I'm confused.
>
> What is the difference between UFS1 and UFS2, and
>> ffsv1 or v2? [...]
> I suspect this is not about UFS1 vs UFS2 but FFS1 (as obtained by
> newfs without -O) vs FFS v2 (as obtained by newffs -O 2).
Okay, now I'm confused.
What is the difference between UFS1 and UFS2, and what is the
difference between FFS v1 and FFS v2? I've been thnking the
David Holland wrote:
> ffsv1 or v2? I think extended attributes in ffsv1 are known to be
> broken.
extattrctl(8) seems misleading: it says it requires UFS1, but as I
understand, UFS1 is not used anymore, newfs(8) only produces UFS2
filesystems.
I suspect this is not about UFS1 vs UFS2 but FFS1
David Holland wrote:
> ffsv1 or v2? I think extended attributes in ffsv1 are known to be
> broken.
Here is what dumpfs says:
file system: /dev/rwd3a
endian little-endian
magic 11954 (UFS1)timeSat May 7 21:26:19 2011
superblock location 8192id [ 4dc27119 22abc557 ]
cylgr
On Sat, May 07, 2011 at 09:28:23PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> On NetBSD-5.1, when an FFS filesystem has extended attributes, any call
> to statfs(2) will never return from the kernel. ps -axl shows the
> process is sleeping at tstile.
>
> Is it a known problem, is there already a PR for
