On Wednesday 25 May 2005 22:47, Dan Hollis <goemon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > When (not if) the root file system needs a thorough fsck any interruption > > (such as power failure) will result in a non-bootable system. > > But it's still a significant improvement, it used to be that > > --rebuild-tree was not permitted on a ro mounted file system so booting > > from an install CD was necessary to check the root fs. > > Note that XFS won't let you fsck a readonly-mounted fs _at all_. Even a > non destructive read-only check. I've argued with the XFS developers > about this and they stated they don't see this as a problem and they're > not going to fix it. I have no idea why they think this is a good idea. Interesting. I've got a couple of machines that can only boot with an XFS root. Fortunately I can easily remove the disks from them. > > > Alternatively you could put a reiser3 image on ext2 if you really want > > > to do that. It's not hard. > > > > Sure it's not hard. That's nice to know AFTER you've done it and had > > your data corrupted (as has happened to several people). > > Who? Me and Roger Wolff. Just repeat the test I performed a few hours ago. Why are you so argumentative about things which you can easily test? You don't have to believe me, do your own tests and you'll get the same results. > > > reiserfs (at least up to 2.6.11.10) doesnt have working support for > > > selinux attributes. > > > > The latest rawhide kernel seems to have it. Did you do any tests? > > You mean FC4T3 installer has it? Or you mean the latest kernel > downloadable via yum updater? 2.6.11-1.1319_FC4 has it. As for FC4T3, that depends on the kernel, the installer, etc. Why not test it? Ext3 is the default file system for Fedora for reasons which have already been explained. As the default choice Ext3 gets the most testing from Red Hat employees, also Ext3 is a priority for testing as it's in RHEL. The purpose of this list is for people from the community to assist us with testing, and this particularly applies to non-default options. It would be good if you could help us in this regard. I'm sure that FC4 release will have a kernel at least as recent as 2.6.11-1.1319_FC4. So I don't expect any problems using ReiserFS and SE Linux on FC4 release. > > Finally, are there still known situations where a corrupt ReiserFS file > > system could corrupt kernel memory? This was the bug that got me to > > convert the root file systems of machines I own to use Ext2/3. > > None that I know of. If there were you would expect them to be reported in > linux-kernel or bugzilla, and I don't see anything. They were reported years ago on the ReiserFS list. Hans didn't seem inclined to fix them as fixing such bugs incurred a performance penalty. If that policy has changed in the ReiserFS development team then I'll write some scripts to randomly corrupt ReiserFS file systems and try to reproduce kernel bugs. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page