Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (1165 mails)

[Alex <one_way@xxxxxxxxx>]

> > There is no _need_ to do so.  It is just an extra level of safety to do
> > regular checks to detect inconsistencies as early as possible.  This is
> > like doing backups: You don't _have_ to do them but it is generally
> > considered a wise choice to do so.
> >> that something might be wrong, then let the fs check itself - but not
> >> just because the computer has been sut off cleanly off a couple of
> >> times.
> > The problem is that often you have to check the filesystem to _find_ that
> > there is a reason that something might be wrong.  Obviously the other
> > solution is to wait until a inconsistency has managed to garble all your
> > data.
> ... and not to forget: you can always abort an unwanted "regular" ext3
> filesystem check during boot with CTRL-C.

Well, for me the question remains why most other filesystems seemingly don't 
need this regular checks and are nevertheless considered safe enough??

It's obviously not my decision and I will simply stay with ReiserFS, but I 
would consider it a bad decision to let loose an filesystem on the average 
home user which forces him to do regular checks. (Situation might be differnt 
for servers which run 24/7 and where absolute data integrity is a must.)

If I shut down the computer I want it shut down (and safe to disconnect from 
power), if I turn it on, I want to have the desktop running as fast as 
possible. I - as a home user - don't want to supervise the boot- or 
shutdown-process, whether the computer decides to do some time consuming 
self-diagnosis.

Just my opinion, based on the fact that Ext2 self checks drove me nuts in 
former days ;).

Alex
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx