SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
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.
in 2.4.x, when using menuconfig, the ext3 module was available only if ext3 was chosen. i didn't see any such behaviour when using gconfig and menuconfig. ext3 could be selected without ext2. just wanted to verify if the configs are right.
Originally posted by Shade After all, ext3 is just a journaling extension of ext2 -- It stands to reason that the lower level is required.
in that case gconfig and menuconfig (or whichever file handles the dependencies) has a bug, coz it allows me to choose ext3 without ext2. in menuconfig for 2.4.26 stock kernel of slack10, ext2 and 3 are in different places in the file-system list. for 188.8.131.52 it's independent (but in the same place).
according to the README.initrd by volkerding, ext3 requires jbd (and shows up like that in lsmod also). and this dependency is definitely not taken care of in gconfig and menuconfig.
Well, I wouldn't call it a bug. It's just a little counter-intuitive.
There are lots of things like that -- if you use make menuconfig and hit ? on some options, it will tell you something along the lines of "If you choose this, you should say yes to such and such options below."
Ext3 is one of those.
then it would seem to me that you should build both into the kernel directly. I can't look at my own 184.108.40.206 config at the moment, so I'll have to check it. If your root filesystem is ext3 then I don't think it'd be wise to not build support directly into the kernel.