LinuxQuestions.org
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   Slackware (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/)
-   -   My own smallish yet simplish review of Slackware 14.0 (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/my-own-smallish-yet-simplish-review-of-slackware-14-0-a-4175430799/)

ruario 10-13-2012 03:34 PM
Syslinux is a collection of bootloaders, including extlinux (which can read Ext2,3,4/btrfs partitions). Also you do not need to have a separate partition for extlinux if /boot is already on an ext or btrfs partition.

linux-sys-adm 10-13-2012 03:40 PM
Great review! How long did it take you to install? I like Arch because you install it once. Would you even compare the two and if not, why choose SlackWare over Arch (not saying you did)?

thx

jtsn 10-13-2012 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario (Post 4804932)
Also you do not need to have a separate partition for extlinux if /boot is already on an ext or btrfs partition.
My /boot is on a ext LV. Does it count?

ruario 10-13-2012 04:21 PM
@jtsn: Not sure, never tried but you could use btrfs and remove much (or all) of the need for LVM. As a side note Lilo will not reliably boot kernels from btrfs and this the most likely filesystem to supersede ext4.

EDIT: I did some searching and it seems the current answer is no, extlinux cannot currently boot off an LVM partition so for that you would need a separate partition just for extlinux.

jtsn 10-13-2012 04:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario (Post 4804975)
@jtsn: Not sure, never tried but you could use btrfs and remove much (or all) of the need for LVM. As a side note Lilo will not reliably boot kernels from btrfs and this the most likely filesystem to supersede ext4.
I don't consider btrfs in the foreseeable future, because there is only one GPL-licensed implementation (thus Linux-only) and it originated at Oracle. Ext4 is way better supported.

ruario 10-13-2012 04:48 PM
You might change your mind one day. Ted Ts'o (ext4's maintainer) sees btrfs as the future.

http://arstechnica.com/information-t...-kernel-panel/

Quote:
Originally Posted by arstechnica
Despite the fact that Ext4 adds a number of compelling features to the filesystem, T'so doesn't see it as a major step forward. He dismisses it as a rehash of outdated "1970s technology" and describes it as a conservative short-term solution. He believes that the way forward is Oracle's open source Btrfs filesystem, which is designed to deliver significant improvements in scalability, reliability, and ease of management.

jtsn 10-13-2012 07:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ruario (Post 4805005)
You might change your mind one day. Ted Ts'o (ext4's maintainer) sees btrfs as the future.
ReiserFS is the future, btrfs is the future, systemd is the future and so on...

I stick to the KISS principle, especially regarding file systems. Once bitten, twice shy.

ruario 10-14-2012 04:44 AM
Comparing btrfs to systemd seems relatively silly to me. Additionally we are well off topic so I think I'd rather just drop out of this thread.

ssl779 10-14-2012 07:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by GazL (Post 4804578)
I thought syslinux used a DOS FAT filesystem?
sorry, my mistake, I should say EXTLINUX (which is part of Syslinux suite)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 PM.
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page