Dale,
You are assuming a multi-partition system. I have two partitions,
/boot and /. This is my own, machine, i.e., only one user. /boot is
ext2fs because at the time, you couldn't boot from a ReiserFS
partition.
My cynical view of ReiserFS is that it is a way to avoid waiting
for fsck at boot time. It is a journaling, not a logging, filesystem
which means that metadata is always consistent, but not necessary the
data in the files. Back when I was locking up X when playing Quake 3,
I lost the uptime records about one third of the reboots.
Jeffrey
Quoting Dale Schuster
On 7 Jun 2001, at 11:44, Oliver Maunder wrote:
I've got the same sort of setup - SuSE 7.0 with 2.2.16, and my root fs is Reiser.
I am a little confused on what the Reiser FS really is. I am under the impression that it is a reliable way to avoid corruption on a filesystem if the system crashes unexpectedly. If this is correct, why would this FS be used on root? The root FS isn't very dynamic. If things ever change on root it is usually a substantial system modifications that don't happen very often. Maybe a few new mount points and such, but would this be considered a great risk if done when the system happens to crash?
Am I way off base here? Can someone please bring me back to the light?
~Dale
________________________________
Dale Schuster MIS Manager Lake Tahoe Horizon Casino Resort dschuster@horizoncasino.com
-- I don't do Windows and I don't come to work before nine. -- Johnny Paycheck