On Sun, 2006-02-19 at 16:05 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > Once upon a time, Peter Jones <pjones@xxxxxxxxxx> said: > > On Sat, 2006-02-18 at 12:08 -0600, Chris Adams wrote: > > > I'm looking at how installs from local hard disk are handled (looking at > > > the FC rawhide anaconda). It looks like the mount is done as ext2 or > > > vfat, read-only in either case. Does ext2 read-only mean _really_ > > > read-only? Is it safe to use a partition that is really half of a Linux > > > software RAID mirror (without causing the mirror to get out of sync)? > > > > Yes -- but keep in mind that you can't really mount a modern ext3 > > filesystem as ext2 anyway. > > A cleanly shut down ext3 won't mount cleanly read-only as ext2 anymore? > Since when? I just tried it and it worked. What doesn't work about it? OK, so my previous statement is partly true and partly not. It should always be mountable with the current ext2 driver, but it isn't necessarily mounted with older kernels. Particularly of interest are htree directories. But support for this in ext2 was added after it was added to ext3, and I suspect that trend will continue in the future, so at any given time it isn't really something I'd expect we can rely on :/ > If that's the case, are hard drive installs going to be removed? I'm > not going to create a VFAT partition just for that. Jeremy, of course, already changed it to use ext3 by default. -- Peter
