*BSD News Article 47701


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!ec531667.slip.cc.uq.oz.au!robert
From: robert@ec531667.slip.cc.uq.oz.au (Robert Brockway)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: NetBSD Filesystems
Date: 1 Aug 1995 09:20:36 GMT
Organization: String to put in the Organization Header
Lines: 75
Message-ID: <3vkrl4$qgl@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au>
References: <1995Jul26.123455.28242@lssec.bt.co.uk> <MICHAELV.95Jul29005359@MindBender.HeadCandy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ec531667.slip.cc.uq.oz.au
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]

Michael L. VanLoon (michaelv@MindBender.HeadCandy.com) wrote:
: In article <1995Jul26.123455.28242@lssec.bt.co.uk> bwheeler@lssec.bt.co.uk (Ben/Jammin Wheeler) writes:

:    Here are my questions:
:    Does NetBSD only have its own ``proprietary'' filesystem?

: No, it uses a standard BSD FFS (Fast FileSystem).  It could be
: considered "proprietary" in the sense that nothing DOS-ish will read
: it, nor will Linux (though that's their own prejudice).

It's got nothing to do with prejudice.  If someone wanted a FFS under
linux they need only write a kernel module for it.  They don't need anyones
ok to do it.

: Maybe.  I believe the current 4.4 FFS in NetBSD is a superset of what
: the Sparc understands.  Many of the commercial unix systems use a
: derivative of the 4.2 FFS (SunOS, DEC Ultrix, etc....).  However,
: almost every vender has "enhanced" their version in subtle but
: slightly incompatible ways.

It may have been this lack of standardisation that lead to Linux adopting
other filesystems over FFS.

:    Is there any support for other filesystems, specifically MS-DOG FAT, Minix, Linux
:    Ext2, Linux Xiafs?

: NetBSD will let you mount a DOS partition read/write for import/export
: purposes, but I don't believe you can actually run the system off a
: DOS partition.  It does not understand Linux "proprietary"
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^
A port of the extended 2 file system is under way for FreeBSD.

: filesystems.  Though someone some day may get the urge to write the
: code to make that possible.  Most likely it would be for compatibility
: import/export purposes also, since there is nothing inherently better
: about the Linux filesystems vs. BSD 4.4 FFS (nor inherently worse).
: Some say the Linux filesystem isn't quite as robust or well-tested as
: FFS, but the Linux people deny that vehemently.

12 months ago i would have said the extended 2 (ext2) file system wasn't
as safe, but a lot of water has passed under the bridge and now i would
say it is perfectly safe.  In 14 months of heavy use i have never lost a file,
that i know of.

:    The reason for this is that I'd like to try NetBSD alongside Linux on my machine,
:    but have them share the same partition and filesystem (but obviously putting
:    NetBSD binaries and libs in a different place to Linux binaries and libs!) If
:    NetBSD only supports its own little filesystem, presumably this becomes
:    impossible.

: NetBSD only "supports its own little filesystem" in the same way Linux
: only "supports its own little filesystem".  The difference being that
: the NetBSD "proprietary" fs is a derivative of one of the most
: standard filesystems in unix.  The Linux folks, on the other hand,
: have taken a religious position that FFS is not good enough for them,
: written their own proprietary fs, and refuse to write a true FFS for
: Linux, last I heard.  For all intents and purposes, both filesystems
: are pretty much functionally equivalent.

: Bottom line: yes, will probably have to reformat the drive for each
: system.  However, both can read tar'd floppies, so you don't
: necessarily have to lose all your data.

As long as NetBSD observes standard Dos (yuk) partition table conventions
(Linux does)  they should be able to live happily with Dos on a disk.

: Most of what I've just said also applies to FreeBSD fs vs. Linux.

I know FreeBSD observes the correct partition table setup to be
compatible with Linux and dos partitions.
	-Robert

email ec531667@student.uq.edu.au my reply-to is temporarily out of action.
"Since the dodecahedron has 12 faces, it makes an ideal desk calendar."
Gary Chartrand and Ortrud R. Oellermann, Applied and Algorithmic Graph Theory.