Search results for query: ext3

More recently, ext2fs that comes in FreeBSD's base is capable of reading and writing ext4 filesystems. It's claimed to work on ext2 and ext3 as well. Previously, sysutils/fusefs-ext2 had to be used, or ext2fs could only mount ext4 as read only. Set the ext2fs driver to be loaded by compiling it...

...say - yes, you can rely on it with your eyes closed: "if something goes wrong you can lose all you data like with any fs". But hey.. not with ext3 and 4 (talking about battery, I hope at least). Because ext is for end users not servers. It's the most scary moment in freebsd in 2022 and we...

If you want things to be exactly like Linux I'd recommend that you'd use Linux. ZFS is an extremely capable filesystem with great scalability. It runs very in almost all scenarios from single-drive laptops to multi exabyte cloud storage scenarios. ZFS runs great on a single-drive laptop. In any...

It's much more than that. UFS. Ridiculous statement.

...like LVM+EXT4. It's great! But what if I don't need that "more" functionality on some laptops and looking for a simple variant like exactly ext3/4? So.. something goes wrong with a battery or Anything else. And there is a chance to lose everything? It's not a working variant. It's not...

...that is native or basic to FreeBSD (UFS or ZFS) and for which FreeBSD has a driver. Or a known filesystem is a filesystem that is not native or basic to FreeBSD but, for which there is a special driver available that gives FreeBSD access to that non-native filesystem, for example NTFS or ext3.

gconcat, graid (RAID0). And yes, they're all pretty destructive. Never mind the fact that FreeBSD can only boot from UFS or ZFS and none of the other filesystems.

...way and not destructive method (if there is any) for the moment. I prefer to don't destroy those disks because they are occupied by OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD. I mean, the disks should be for sure formatted using UFS2 or ZFS, not NTFS or ext3/4 because FreeBSD has problems writing on these fs.

Although it's not mentioned in fsck, 13.0-RELEASE also has /sbin/fsck_ext2fs which checks ext2, ext3, and ext4 filesystems included in /etc/fstab.

...don't need to know Linux kernel driver development, and as far as filesystems go it's far far simpler than either the FreeBSD UFS version, or EXT3/4 which are the standard for many linux distros. I'm done here. That's all I can say. Spout all the bull and lies you want. Clearly, this...

That assumes writing one from scratch. I'm not suggesting that. This also assumes a nearly direct free-time focus with at least 10-20 hours of work and QA a week towards a project from each person in a team. And no thank you. GEOM is decently written, but I'm not screwing with ancient UFS2...

...has started. ext4 on the other hand is able to do that since ages. Also ext4 is the direct descendant of default file systems before, ext2 and ext3, while XFS is a third party thing. And aside that some people still believe that XFS will eat data in case of an power outage compared to ext4...

...But I was refering to following article. The article is stating that "XFS also consumes about twice the CPU-per-metadata operation compared to Ext3 and Ext4". I've just drawn a conclusion. If the comparision and my conclusion are wrong, I'll take back my words. Redhat | How to Choose Your Red...

...a codebase worse than even UFS2, and btrfs, which after over a decade in development is still a pile of rubbish. Reiser3 (4 is not in kernel), ext3, JFS etc. are far lower on the development totem pole. What did I miss? Anecdotes man. Is there a white paper for UFS like XFS has? Have you...

How do you mount the partition? I use mount -t ext2fs and can see everything okay using Caja. I remember some time ago, someone else reported having problems seeing ext4 partitions mounted with fusefs, but I don't have the link. From man ext2fs ext2fs

If I don't remember bad,ext2fs doesnt have the write support. Or if it supports it,it is not encouraged. So,without it,how can the errors be fixed with fsck ?

...issues with the file system, of course I don't know if there's some bugs that can prevent you to fix something really bad, but it worked in all of my use case scenarios. I never had a situation that these two tools was unable to give me access or unable to fix external drives under ext3 and ext4.

I've actually encountered this issue on, needing to run fsck on an EXT3/4 partition. Frankly it was more of an issue, that I had a power loss and the partition got marked as dirty/bad and it wouldn't mount without having a fsck run over it first. In the end, I had to rip that drive from the...

...fsck.ext2: Bad magic number in super-block while trying to open /dev/sdc The superblock could not be read or does not describe a valid ext2/ext3/ext4 filesystem. If the device is valid and it really contains an ext2/ext3/ext4 filesystem (and not swap or ufs or something else), then the...