Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!cancer.vividnet.com!hunter.premier.net!feed1.news.erols.com!news From: mcampbel@erols.com (Melinda Campbell and family (check the .sig)) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: *** Is FreeBSD easy to install ??? *** Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 04:53:48 GMT Organization: This house? Are you kidding? Lines: 24 Message-ID: <53hvec$feb@boursy.news.erols.com> References: <3248ab21.5993197@news.inetnow.net> <53ens0$lrs@uriah.heep.sax.de> <53g9fe$e8j@prometheus.acsu.buffalo.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: man-as3s05.erols.com X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 pleung@cs.buffalo.edu (Patrick Leung) wrote: >The FAT file system stinks too. Ever wonder why your harddrive seems >to keep getting slower and slower? It's because you get disk fragmentation >very easily over time. And your filenames are limited to 8+3 characters. Also, DOS is limited to 65,536 blocks on a file system at a time, and it bumps up the block size to compensate for bigger drives--which wastes a LOT of space if you have, say, a 1GB DOS partition (which is probably a bad idea anyway, but hey, it was an example). 32K/block with no frags. What a pain. FAT was invented for floppies, and it should have stayed there. >I admit that no one OS is perfect, and each has it's own problems, >but some are worse than others. By now, the worst of the worst OS >that I've seen thus far are those made by Microsoft. Amen to that. I usually do my work in FreeBSD (2.1-RELEASE) or OS/2 Warp 3.0. At least in Warp you can have a half-decent file system... Lee C. -- Manassas, VA, USA Melinda's my mom--I'm home this semeter!