[conspire] $YOUR_FAVOURITE_FILESYSTEM sucks
rick at linuxmafia.com
Wed Sep 5 14:28:19 PDT 2007
Quoting Daniel Gimpelevich (daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us):
[JFS, and sharing of drives among distributions. Mutibooting, I
> Sadly, this is an area where Ubuntu is a bit behind the curve. Ubuntu
> still insists that ext3 is the best default.
Bearing in mind that I don't multiboot, I'm still of the mind that ext3
has, over the last few years, been the safest (of available journaling
FS options) for data protection, in the general case. It's the best
debugged on account of good maintenance and very wide testing, has
mature and well-designed fsck and other ancillary utilities, tops out at
reasonable sizes (say I, having not gotten that exabyte hard drive yet),
and is designed defensively with the failure modes of commodity PC
hardware in mind.
I'm delighted that you two have a high opinion of JFS, because that
raises some hope that you'll do all that great pioneering QA work that I
always appreciate someone _other than me_ doing.
> There's nothing wrong with recommending more than one thing.
>> I find the buntu crowd so proud of their choices they lose honesty and
>> like to describe it as "TENDENTION" both as dishonesty from excessive
>> partisanship and the medical term for an undeveloped fetus.
> This may actually be more of that "California" thing that Rick was talking
I think I may have lost track of what this concerns. Bruce had made
some mostly-unparseable and vague reference to inveighing against GNOME
HIG provisions, right?
My referenced wording must have been that bit about "the rationalisation
stage required following all screw-ups". It's the oddest thing, and
just might be yet another bit of damage to the national culture that
California must one day answer for: You point out that party A has
messed up, citing reasonably objective evidence of same.
Party A's response _could_ reasonably be one of the following:
o "You're mistaken about your facts." Refutation follows.
o "Your implication of wrongful effect is in error" (the "so what?"
o "You are correct, but other good effects outweight that" (cited).
However, the classic California-culture response is none of those,
but rather an hours-long digression onto protestation of good motives.
Which is of course completely irrelevant to the point -- and raises the
reasonable suspicion that some arbitrary number of future screw-ups will
be justified the same way.
More information about the conspire