2009/9/7 TheOther <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:theother1510@sbcglobal.net">theother1510@sbcglobal.net</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Ray Rashif wrote:<br>
> 2009/9/7 Ray Rashif <<a href="mailto:schivmeister@gmail.com">schivmeister@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:schivmeister@gmail.com">schivmeister@gmail.com</a>>><br>
<div><div class="h5">><br>
> JFS is low-latency, low-power, and all-around performer. As such, it<br>
> suits a mobile platform with 5400RPM disks.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Oops, forgot to continue:<br>
><br>
> For speedier and larger disks, ext3/4. Both XFS and ReiserFS have their<br>
> cons. Google and you'll land upon a pretty old review, but JFS and EXT3<br>
> come up ahead of the others.<br>
<br>
</div></div>A few years ago I had trouble in booting a Linux box that did not have<br>
Ext2 or Ext3 for the file system. True, I wasn't using a specific<br>
/boot partition, just a / partition.<br>
<br>
Can you now boot with a / partition in something other than Ext2 or<br>
Ext3? Or is the approach to use a /boot partition in Ext2 or Ext3,<br>
and then use whatever file system you want for / and the rest of the<br>
partitions?<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Stephen.<br>
<div><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
Linux-audio-user mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org">Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user" target="_blank">http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yes, it might've been an issue in the past. Even /boot now is alright with NTFS!<br></div><div><br></div><div>With that said, however, either leave everything on one and the same format, or use a non-journalled fs on /boot. Why? Because a journalled fs on /boot does nothing and is wasted.</div>