Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
|
| Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
 |
GNU/Linux Basic Guide
This 255-page guide will provide you with the keys to understand the philosophy of free software, teach you how to use and handle it, and give you the tools required to move easily in the world of GNU/Linux. Many users and administrators will be taking their first steps with this GNU/Linux Basic guide and it will show you how to approach and solve the problems you encounter.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free. |
|
 |
10-19-2006, 11:39 AM
|
#1
|
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2005
Location: Bay
Distribution: Zenwalk, OpenBSD, Slackware
Posts: 167
Rep: 
|
am I the only one that noticed this?
During Slackware 11 install, I noticed that the highlighted choice on the filesystems chooser menu was XFS.
Does this mean that XFS is now the default filesystem on Slackware?
Did the Hans Reiser debacle have anything to do with this change of heart?
David
10/19
|
|
|
|
|
10-19-2006, 11:43 AM
|
#2
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Jul 2005
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 2,006
Rep:
|
That didn't happen for me, and the Hans Reiser debacle was after Slack 11 got released
|
|
|
|
|
10-19-2006, 12:45 PM
|
#3
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Luxemburg
Distribution: Slackware, OS X
Posts: 1,507
Rep:
|
AFAIK the installer just highlights the lexically last choice, in this case XFS. XFS and ReiserFS have had a lot of bad press recently so if you are concerned just choose ext3.
|
|
|
|
|
10-19-2006, 01:27 PM
|
#4
|
|
Member
Registered: May 2004
Location: Southwestern USA
Distribution: CentOS
Posts: 279
Rep:
|
Yes, I noticed that some time ago and mentioned it in a post. I don't think it means anything. Go with uselpa's suggestion. It's hard to beat success and you'll have a clean upgrade path the ext4 when it's released, unlike Reiser4 which will require a reformat and Reiser4 has been described as an "interesting research project."
Dennisk
|
|
|
|
|
10-19-2006, 07:30 PM
|
#5
|
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2003
Location: UK
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 3,081
|
So it's possible to upgrade from etx3 to ext4 with no format? But reiser3 to resiser4 will need a reformat/reinstall?
|
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:18 PM.
|
|
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
|
 Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|
