*BSD News Article 80335


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!