Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: piclist-bounces@mit.edu [mailto:piclist-bounces@mit.edu] On
>>     
> Behalf
>   
>> Of Tamas Rudnai
>> Sent: 11 May 2010 17:09
>> To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.
>> Subject: Re: [TECH] Alt FS, (was Truncated file recovery)
>>
>>
>> Or they can choose etx4 for example which then already have a driver
>>     
> for
>   
>> Linux and Windows as well, they just have to perfecting the Windows
>> drivers
>> and job done.
>>
>>     
>
> What about Mac and legacy systems? And then they have to provide support
> these drivers for each OS; it's not a trivial or cheap exercise any way
> you look at it.
>
> Mike
>   
And ext4 is somewhat unproven. My local netbook user was also unhappy 
with ext3 and considered FAT32 (bad idea actually for any *NIX as it 
lacks certain needed attributes).

I'm fairly sure ext2 is not a journalling FS.
ext2 can cheerfully scramble the entire filesystem with an unexpected 
power cut. I tested NT4.0 running Wingate & MDaemon on NTFS vs Clark 
Connect (linux) running iptables, sendmail etc with power outages on IDE 
and SCSI drives. The Ext2 needed rebuilt everytime to boot, NTFS was 
fine. In 16 years of NTFS usage I've never lost NTFS files from a power 
cut. (Disk failures #2 and User Deletion #1)

I agree totally that all flavours of FAT are rubbish. But I don't know 
what the alternative is. Development on ReiserFS*,  *Reiser3 has ceased, 
and allegedly there is work on Reiser4 (but how good is this without 
Hans Reiser?). Its journalling is supposed to be on a par with ext3

ext3 is the first mainstream linux journalling FS, and has replaced 
ReiserFS on some distros. But it's quite recent really.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext3

It's about the only candidate  as  better alternative to FAT. You can 
add a driver on Windows (probably, like I have with ext2) for seamless 
use of existing console and gui tools as the FS support on NT is modular 
(it may even still support HPFS as well as FAT12, FAT, FAT32, CDFS, UDF, 
Juliet, etc)

ext3 recovery:

There is no support of deleted file recovery in file system design. Ext3 
driver actively deletes files by wiping file inodes for crash safety 
reasons. That's why accidental 'rm -rf ...' may cause permanent data loss.

IMO ext3 is substandard to 1993 NTFS and HPFS. ext4 may be better.

 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist