Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!yarrina.connect.com.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!sun4nl!hacktic!oea.hacktic.nl!dan From: dan@oea.hacktic.nl Subject: Re: I know this one is as old as the hills..... References: <2llf7f$qrn@explorer.clark.net> Organization: The Humble Abode Date: Fri, 11 Mar 1994 13:08:00 GMT X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8] Message-ID: <CMI4HD.A8I@oea.hacktic.nl> Lines: 22 Eric S. Hvozda (ack@clark.net) wrote: : I can atest to this. I got tired of losing ext2 partitions under linux and : e2fsck not being able to recover them. It got really annoying when it turned : out to be /. Hell, It got to where I could even repeat it on a regular basis. While I agree that ufs is to be considered the more reliable of the two, if only because it has been around longer, let us not forget that thousands are using ext2 fs without a problem. I've been using ext2fs for over a year now and I've never lost a partition or even a file. I've seen some odd error messages but that is about it. This system has a heavy load including news traffic and compiling. I also have a FreeBSD system and I've seen file system corruption on it and I even lost a few source files due to that. The moral of the story is that extraneous factors contribute to file system reliability and hence anecdotal evidence doesn't prove a thing. -- |< Dan Naas dan@oea.hacktic.nl >| +--------------------------------------+