LinuxQuestions.org - ext3 required ext2 in 2.6.x?

- Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)

- - ext3 required ext2 in 2.6.x? (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/ext3-required-ext2-in-2-6-x-220154/)

abs	08-20-2004 09:48 AM

ext3 required ext2 in 2.6.x?

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.

i've compiled them both in anyway.

ty
abs

insyte

08-20-2004 12:56 PM

Dunno if that's a bug but it's safer to compile them both.

Shade

08-21-2004 12:44 AM

It's not safer.. It's required if your root file system is ext3 ;)
After all, ext3 is just a journaling extension of ext2 -- It stands to reason that the lower level is required.

--Shade

abs	08-21-2004 06:02 PM

Quote:

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 2.6.8.1 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.

can somone verify this behaviour?

abs

related: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...hreadid=219548

Shade

08-22-2004 12:13 AM

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.
--Shade

abs	08-22-2004 07:05 AM

ok. that makes sense.

dunno why they changed the behaviour though. the depencies of ext2, 3 (and now jdb) used to be shown nested in the fs options tree.

ty

Cedrik

08-22-2004 01:12 PM

It should be noted that jdb is not required to enable ext3 feature as it is for debuging journaled fs purpose.

abs	08-22-2004 03:33 PM

i'd agree, but read the following part in volkerding's Slackware initrd mini HOWTO:

Quote:

Here's another example: Build an initrd image using Linux 2.6.7 kernel
modules for a system with an ext3 root partition on /dev/hdb3. Note
that you need both the jbd and ext3 modules to use ext3:

mkinitrd -c -k 2.6.7 -m jbd:ext3 -f ext3 -r /dev/hdb3

so, now what?

KMcD	08-23-2004 04:41 AM

You only need to do that if you build ext3 support as a module, if you build it directly into the kernel then you do not have to make an initrd image.

abs	08-23-2004 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by KMcD
You only need to do that if you build ext3 support as a module, if you build it directly into the kernel then you do not have to make an initrd image.

ok, but what about the dependecy of ext3 on jdb?

in xconfig, jdb (the first jdb listed) gets selected if u choose ext3.

KMcD	08-25-2004 06:31 AM

then it would seem to me that you should build both into the kernel directly. I can't look at my own 2.6.8.1 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.

abs	08-25-2004 08:27 PM

read the posts following this one: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...18#post1124418

ext2 can handle ext3 initially. i've built both into the kernel.

what happened about ur config info?

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:50 PM.