Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Sun, 23 Sep 2001 21:45:08 -0700 | From | Aaron Lehmann <> | Subject | Re: Linux-2.4.10 + ext3 |
| |
On Sun, Sep 23, 2001 at 08:45:22PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > So yes, it would be nice if an ext3-only kernel could drive ext2 > filesystems, but not super-important.
Cool.
> As for the other part of your suggestion: make ext2 "obsolete": > I don't think so. ext3 is wickedly complex, and ext2 is the > reference filesystem for Linux. It could be argued (at length) that > the VFS and block layers were designed for, and are almost part of > ext2.
I didn't mean to imply this. I love ext2 and still use it more than probably any other filesystem (judging by numbers of partitions).
I simply was hoping for insted of:
<*> EXT2 fs <*> EXT3 fs
(which is required today for most ext3-using people who want to do ext2 mounts)
... there could be:
<*> EXT2 fs <*> EXT3 journalling extensions
AFAIK this would eliminate a lot of duplicate kernel code for ext3 users.
But anyway, I'm not saying that ext2 should be made obsolete. I only use ext3 on one machine and I would be much more annoyed if I had to enable ext3 on the other machines than live with my current situation of needing both ext2 and ext3 in the kernel on this particular one.
I think you understand ;-). - 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/
|  |