Per Jessen wrote:

That is a real pity. I've mentioned the problems on the JFS mailinglist, but nothing much seems to be happening. Can anyone here describe the problem? All I've noticed is that booting from a JFS root doesn't work too well :-(

I used JFS on my desktop machines because it has good performace and doesn't burn CPU cycles like reiserfs or xfs. I really would like to see it supported again in future SuSE Linux/openSUSE-releases. If necessary I volunteer for testing. -- Jens Siebert

On Saturday 13 August 2005 12:24 pm, Shriramana Sharma wrote:

Jens Siebert wrote:

...

I used JFS on my desktop machines because it has good performace and doesn't burn CPU cycles like reiserfs or xfs.

Excuse me, but what is this JFS? I tried googling but I came up with http://inet.uni2.dk/~jemor/jfs.htm which didn't seem right. Seeing as it is spoken of along with reiserfs, I assume that it (jfs, along with xfs) is a filesystem, like ext3 or vfat.

It's NOT broken. JFS is a file system that is a gift from IBM. Both JFS and reiserfs are journal type file systems and are, IMHO, far better than all others. I've been using reiserfs exclusively for almost 3 years with NO problems......."solid as a grape ape!" ;) Fred -- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft. We have no bugs in our software, Never! We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost to you, at this time.

On Saturday 13 August 2005 1:52 pm, Shriramana Sharma wrote:

Fred A. Miller wrote:

...

...

Excuse me, but what is this JFS? I tried googling but I came up with http://inet.uni2.dk/~jemor/jfs.htm which didn't seem right. Seeing as it is spoken of along with reiserfs, I assume that it (jfs, along with xfs) is a filesystem, like ext3 or vfat.

It's NOT broken.

Um, did I say it was? (Maybe someone earlier on on this thread did - I erase old messages to save disk space.)

Sorry......read too fast and not enough sleep.....read your "spoken" as "broken." I've got to get more rest! Fred -- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft. We have no bugs in our software, Never! We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost to you, at this time.

On Saturday 13 August 2005 2:17 pm, Janne Karhunen wrote:

On Saturday 13 August 2005 20:28, Fred A. Miller wrote:

...

It's NOT broken. JFS is a file system that is a gift from IBM. Both JFS and reiserfs are journal type file systems and are

I'm kinda having second thoughs about reiserfs as it seems to eat CPU cycles fairly heavily (with 2.6, haven't noticed this with 2.4). What is this load? Real work or is it just spinning

'Wish I could answer you better. I notice that in 9.3 the system does write to the hard drive consistently and it's less than a min. interval. However, I don't see in xosview a lot of cpu cycles being used. Fred -- Planet Earth - a subsidiary of Microsoft. We have no bugs in our software, Never! We do have undocumented added features, that you will find amusing, at no added cost to you, at this time.

...

...

On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 1:03 pm, in message , per@computer.org wrote: Jens Siebert wrote:

...

I used JFS on my desktop machines because it has good performace and doesn't burn CPU cycles like reiserfs or xfs. I really would like to see it supported again in future SuSE Linux/openSUSE- releases. If necessary I volunteer for testing.

I'll bring it up on the JFS list again - any comment from SuSE on this matter? What exactly made you remove support for JFS from 9.3? We use exclusively JFS and have been since 1.1 or thereabouts.

JFS support is in 9.3, it's just not available in the installer. But all the jfsutils are included

Anders Johansson wrote:

JFS support is in 9.3, it's just not available in the installer. But all the jfsutils are included.

Well, that's not the complete truth. Not only is it not supported during install, but it also cannot boot from JFS. (no JFS module in the initrd). Getting a 9.3 system to work on JFS is a little complicated to say the least. Anyway, I got the answer from Dave Kleikamp just a little while ago:

The problem is triggered by the /etc/init.d/earlykdm script.  It runs the preload command against a list of files that includes directories, and the directories caused jfs to get confused, and think there was file corruption.

Workaround is to disable the earlykdm script, or at least the lines that run preload.

He included a patch in this posting - see the jfs mailing list for details. He also says he missed the cut-off for 9.3 - the updates are clearly ready for 10.0, but I think someone already confirmed that 10.0 will not have the JFS installation support either. Pity. /Per Jessen, Zürich

Philipp Thomas wrote:

Nothing is in the initrd unless it is put there. Yes, you have to tell mkinitrd to put the module into the initrd by editing INITRD_MODULES.

I am well aware of that. My point was - even if SuSE does not support installing onto a JFS file-system, they could have supported booting from one - by noticing that root was on JFS and then including JFS in the initrd when it is built at install time.

...

He included a patch in this posting - see the jfs mailing list for details.

Now that openSUSE exists, why don't you enter it as a bug in our bugzilla? If you do, please post the bug number so that I and others may add themselves to the cc:.

It should already be recorded, but I'll check. /Per Jessen, Zürich -- http://www.spamchek.ch/freetrial - managed anti-spam and anti-virus solution. Überzeugen Sie sich - 30 Tage kostenlos und unverbindlich!

Per Jessen wrote:

I found no record of any problems reported regarding JFS, so I added this:

https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=104870

Great! Thanks for creating the bug-report! Now let's see if this works ;-) -- Jens Siebert