-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Monday 2008-01-21 at 14:48 -0500, James Knott wrote:
'80s) defragging wasn't required. Here it is almost 20 years later and Windows still requires it.
Requires, requires... not really. It does benefit (greatly) from it, though.
Well then, HPFS, EXT2 etc., work fine, without worrying about it. Fragmentation resistant file systems have been around for a long time. Why doesn't MS use one?
I know. Isn't ntfs more resistant? I suppose FAT has outgrown its initial design usage for floppies and small disks, and it has been a practical sucess, despite its shorthcommings. It is not inherently a bad system, just... different. Other systems were better designed. Is not the ext2 design newer than fat? The fragmentation problem of fat was known before linux was born. There is another detail: IMO, fragmentation of fat occurs not because of the format, but because of the way it is used. It would be the task of the operating system to avoid fragmentation of the files, by writing them properly, and even correcting them later on. The format allows for that, but the operating system does not. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4-svn0 (GNU/Linux) iD4DBQFHlc9ItTMYHG2NR9URAlJtAJEBpPQlUF1Nv2A9OJtKCP4+S1i6AJwMfS9t 4sJUXnAml9GoVWuhpUcPFw== =f2S9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org