XFS, ReiserFS, And ext3 Comparisons

[tom]

Greets list...

Net Llama! <netllama at linux-sxs.org> wrote:

>On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Robert E. Raymond wrote:
>> On Tuesday 25 March 2003 03:20 pm, Net Llama! wrote:
>> > On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Robert E. Raymond wrote:
>> > > I've been using only 2.5.xx since mid-October.  No data loss or anything
>> > > major- finally have USB again after some issues with ACPI, APIC, and
>> > > VIA's odd implementation.
>> >
>> > I'll admit i've never played with 2.5.x.  I've heard/read that it uses a
>> > different kernel configuration mechanism (not xconfig/menuconfig??).  is
>> > this the case?  if so, could you elaborate on how building a kernel
>> > differes with 2.5.x?  maybe a short SxS for folks who are experienced
>> > building 2.4.x kernels?
>>
>> I'll consider that but I can just highlight the differences here:
>>
>> Menuconfig and xconfig are still present in 2.5.x.  Menuconfig really hasn't
>> changed much.  A few menus, such as the input device section have been
>> changed somewhat, mainly to add more options.  Xconfig is *very* different,
>> and I guess I could take a look at it (I've been using menuconfig only for
>> who knows how long).  Should be pretty easy for anyone to figure out, tho it
>> does seem to have a qt dependence now.
>
>Qt dependency??  eeek.  what kind of crack was Linus smoking when he
>blessed that change?  good ole tk/tcl always worked well, especially on
>leaner systems.  *sigh*

I first saw this when I ran xconfig on 2.5.46, and I was surprised when 
I saw it, a MS windows look-a-like file save menu system off Explorer.

This was probably created appease all those NT sysadmins who like their 
MS Windows GUI directory box.  It looks a lot like NT's 
file save feature from Explorer.  Slightly like what Mozilla
has for saving html pages when you visit a site.

You can even create a directory and move around the file system
to save your config files in a differenent location.

I guess the times, and progress, are always a changing...


>
>> As of maybe around 2.5.6x, make dep is no longer needed, and the instructions
>> say to 'make bzImage' after you get done saving your config.  I tend to run
>> 'make modules' anyway, and this builds most of the compiled in stuff anyway,
>> tho make bzImage still needs to be run.
>
>err...'make modules' or 'make dep'?
>
>> Also you get to replace modutils with module-init-tools.  It will keep your
>> old modutils for easy swapping between 2.4.x and 2.5.x kernels.. I think it
>> renames the files to *.old or something.  I've not bothered saving them
>> because 2.4.x doesn't like my highpoint 374 for some reason.
>
>so module-init-tools is backwards compatible with 2.4.x kernel builds, or
>does this basically require you to keep both modutils & module-init-tools
>on the system if you wish to build both 2.4.x & 2.5.x kernels?
>
>> Is that enough, or should I go ahead and write an SxS?
>
>personally, i'd still like a real SxS, if you don't mind, and have the
>time.  thanks!

I agree with Net Llama on this one...I haven't had the time to
to really review all of the 2.5 kernel material yet...a SXS would
be nice...



---tm---
Linux Registration Number; 184093, 
http://counter.li.org


__________________________________________________________________
Try AOL and get 1045 hours FREE for 45 days!
http://free.aol.com/tryaolfree/index.adp?375380

Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 for FREE! Download Now!
http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promos=380455