> > I don't think that's true. ext2 has certainly been around for longer, > but I'm sure ext3 wasn't generally available when I switched to > ReiserFS. Since ext3 is an easier upgrade, I would have tried it > first otherwise. > > Cheers > > Daniel > You may be very right Daniel. I'm speaking form my very limited Redhat perspective, where I think ext3 showed up long before they included reiserfs. I'm pretty much a dummy distro user and don't have much history outside of what RH provides as I use it in my testing of the chips we develop. Anecdotally I'm told that more machines run ext3 than reiserfs, but I certainly don't know that to be true, and I have nothing against reiserfs, since after all I'm using it on my audio drive. My thought is that for a 2-disk audio workstation ext3 or reiserfs is probably fine for the system drive, and I like reiserfs (or even XFS one day...) better for my audio drive. For a single drive DAW it's a much more personal decision I'm sure. Cheers, Mark
