Messages in this thread |  | | From | Andreas Dilger <> | Date | Mon, 24 Sep 2001 15:04:02 -0600 | Subject | Re: Linux-2.4.10 + ext3 |
| |
On Sep 24, 2001 20:49 +0100, Jamie Lokier wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > And the main reason for having the same on-disk format is not, IMO, to > > ease migration between the two filesystems. That's just a once-off > > activity. > > I disagree that it's a once-off activity. I've been known to switch > between ext2 and ext3 and ext2 and ext3... just so I can boot old > kernels such as rescue disks. It's nice to be able to do this.
Well, you don't need to remove the journal just to boot off of a rescue disk. The only requirement is that you have a clean unmount of the ext3 filesystem (although if you DO have a booting problem that can also be a bit of a challenge).
> Also I don't think resize2fs resizes the journal (but I may be wrong), > so I've converted ext3 to ext2 to resize a filesystem, then converted > back.
I think you're wrong on this one. As long as you unmount the filesystem, resize2fs should be able to handle it (as will ext2resize).
> I did have a big disaster once when I compiled ext3 into a kernel and > not ext2 (which I left as a module). You can guess, it couldn't mount > the root filesystem.
Yes, this is one reason why removing the journal all the time is a bad idea. This won't be a problem at some point in the future when it is possible for the ext3 code to mount an unjournaled filesystem (ala ext2), but that still needs a bit of work that isn't very high priority.
Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto, \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |