[LAU] Ext3 or JFS (or other) for linux audio?

[Ray Rashif]

2009/9/7 TheOther <theother1510 at sbcglobal.net>

> Ray Rashif wrote:
> > 2009/9/7 Ray Rashif <schivmeister at gmail.com <mailto:
> schivmeister at gmail.com>>
> >
> >     JFS is low-latency, low-power, and all-around performer. As such, it
> >     suits a mobile platform with 5400RPM disks.
> >
> >
> > Oops, forgot to continue:
> >
> > For speedier and larger disks, ext3/4. Both XFS and ReiserFS have their
> > cons. Google and you'll land upon a pretty old review, but JFS and EXT3
> > come up ahead of the others.
>
> A few years ago I had trouble in booting a Linux box that did not have
> Ext2 or Ext3 for the file system.  True, I wasn't using a specific
> /boot partition, just a / partition.
>
> Can you now boot with a / partition in something other than Ext2 or
> Ext3?  Or is the approach to use a /boot partition in Ext2 or Ext3,
> and then use whatever file system you want for / and the rest of the
> partitions?
>
> Best,
> Stephen.
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-audio-user mailing list
> Linux-audio-user at lists.linuxaudio.org
> http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
>

Yes, it might've been an issue in the past. Even /boot now is alright with
NTFS!

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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linuxaudio.org/pipermail/linux-audio-user/attachments/20090907/6b64c59e/attachment.htm