559 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
559 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Development-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 94 03:13:14 EDT
|
|
Subject: Linux-Development Digest #328
|
|
|
|
Linux-Development Digest #328, Volume #2 Tue, 18 Oct 94 03:13:14 EDT
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: ext2fs vs. Berkeley FFS (Bryan Sparks)
|
|
Slackware boot disk with kernel 1.1.52(or up) and ncr 53c8xx driver (Jin Yang)
|
|
programming each pixel of a vga/ega screen in Linux (Pritish Shah)
|
|
Re: A badly missed feature in gcc (Orc)
|
|
Re: 8-bit ASCII for comm. (A.E. Brouwer)
|
|
Re: A badly missed feature in gcc (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Re: We a FAQ: Linux vs. *BSD!!! (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Lies, Damned Lies, and Benchmarks (take two) (Jeff Kuehn)
|
|
Re: ext2fs vs. Berkeley FFS (Joerg Mertin)
|
|
Re: Question about ext2fs (Joerg Mertin)
|
|
wxWindows 1.50k shared lib wanted (Tall Sword)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bryan@infonaut.com (Bryan Sparks)
|
|
Subject: Re: ext2fs vs. Berkeley FFS
|
|
Date: 17 Oct 1994 15:14:33 -0600
|
|
|
|
Matthew Dillon (dillon@apollo.west.oic.com) wrote:
|
|
: :In article <199410141322.OAA05432@gblinux.demon.co.uk> pdcawley@ftech.co.uk (Piers Cawley) writes:
|
|
: :>
|
|
: :>In article <CHRISB.94Oct11174651@stork.cssc-syd.tansu.com.au>
|
|
: :
|
|
: : Don't be influenced by the over-featurism that NT offers. There's no need
|
|
: : for this crud.
|
|
: :
|
|
: :Actually, my model for this sort of thing is the Mac filesystem. I wouldn't
|
|
: :call it overfeatured, but it does a lot of stuff very well, and very easily,
|
|
: :that is a royal PITA to accomplish with Unix.
|
|
|
|
: Frankly, I see nothing here that can't be EASILY implemented with
|
|
: directories and file extensions. IMHO, Mac resource forks were the
|
|
: second biggest mistake Apple made after the operating system.
|
|
|
|
: It sounds to me that you want a database, not a filesystem.
|
|
|
|
: -Matt
|
|
|
|
: --
|
|
|
|
: Matthew Dillon dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
|
|
: 1005 Apollo Way ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
|
|
: Incline Village, NV. 89451 Obvious Implementations Corporation
|
|
: USA Sandel-Avery Engineering
|
|
: [always include a portion of the original email in any response!]
|
|
|
|
Why not Bento (part of OpenDoc)? It seems that is offers many advantages
|
|
and it is available and it is a standard (debatable, I guess). Another
|
|
thing, it can all be implemented in user space.
|
|
|
|
Bryan
|
|
---
|
|
Bryan Sparks
|
|
bryan@infonaut.com, bryan@kachina.orem.ut.us
|
|
--
|
|
---
|
|
Bryan Sparks
|
|
Phone: 801-226-6056 (home)
|
|
E-Mail: bryan@infonaut.com, bryan@kachina.orem.ut.us
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jinyang@cs.utexas.edu (Jin Yang)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
|
|
Subject: Slackware boot disk with kernel 1.1.52(or up) and ncr 53c8xx driver
|
|
Date: 17 Oct 1994 16:46:00 -0500
|
|
|
|
I would like to install linux on my Intel Premier/PCI pentinum computer
|
|
with a PCI SCSI adapter and a SCSI hard drive. I have downloaded the
|
|
slackware distribution from tsx-11.mit.edu. However, the bootdisk disk
|
|
(ncr.gz, kernel 1.1.19) does not recognize the PCI SCSI adapter (ncr 53c8xx).
|
|
Some very kind people on the net told me that kernel 1.1.52 and up will be
|
|
able to recognize the adapter.
|
|
|
|
Could some one on the net tell me where I can get a slackware bootdisk with
|
|
kernel 1.1.52 (or up) and ncr 53c8xx driver?
|
|
|
|
In fact, I already got a 1.1.56 kernel image file (zImage) from a friend but
|
|
I don't know how to make a bootdisk for slackware. I have another DX33 computer
|
|
running an old version of linux (kernel 0.98). I tried to follow the
|
|
instruction in SLAKWARE.FAQ to make a boot disk myself but failed. The
|
|
instruction in the faq is as follows:
|
|
|
|
... well you grab an existing one like the "bare.gz", put it on a floppy,
|
|
and do this:
|
|
|
|
mount /dev/fd0 /mnt (this mounts it)
|
|
cat zImage > /mnt/vmlinuz (put the new kernel in place)
|
|
rdev -R /mnt/vmlinuz 0 (mount read-write)
|
|
rdev /mnt/vmlinuz /dev/fd0H1440 (use that drive, or /dev/fd0h1200)
|
|
rdev -r /mnt/vmlinuz 1440 (set the ramdisk size, or use 1200 with 1.2 meg)
|
|
lilo -r /mnt (reinstall lilo)
|
|
umount /mnt (that's it! you're done! :^)
|
|
|
|
First, the rdev that I have does not support -R option. Second, when I typed
|
|
lilo -r /mnt, I got the following error message:
|
|
|
|
/etc/lilo/config: no such file or directory
|
|
|
|
Could someone tell me what is the correct way to make a boot disk from an
|
|
image file?
|
|
|
|
Thanks in advance,
|
|
|
|
- Jin Yang
|
|
jinyang@cs.utexas.edu
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: pritish@nic.cic.net (Pritish Shah)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc
|
|
Subject: programming each pixel of a vga/ega screen in Linux
|
|
Date: 17 Oct 1994 22:22:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello all,
|
|
|
|
I am trying to write a display system on Linux that will display
|
|
different messages on the vga/ega screen using different fonts and
|
|
different attributes. I was informed that there might be something called
|
|
getpixel/putpixel function that could work for the screen.
|
|
|
|
Any help would be appreciated. This is for my project at school.
|
|
|
|
Pritish
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
|
|
**********************************************************************
|
|
Pritish M Shah * Contact: Phone 1-313-998-6700
|
|
#include <standard_disclaimer.h> * Fax 1-313-998-6105
|
|
http://www.cic.net/~pritish/ * email pritish@cic.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: orc@pell.com (Orc)
|
|
Subject: Re: A badly missed feature in gcc
|
|
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 03:19:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <hpa.45d30000.Heja.Sverige@ahab.eecs.nwu.edu>,
|
|
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@nwu.edu> wrote:
|
|
> /* ... */ is supported as backward
|
|
>compatibility, but you will be hard-pressed to find a C++ programmer
|
|
>who uses them more than once in a blue moon.
|
|
|
|
I prefer to use them when writing C++ code. // makes my code
|
|
look like assembly language.
|
|
|
|
____
|
|
david parsons \bi/ followups set out of c.o.l.d
|
|
\/
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: aeb@wsdw01.win.tue.nl (A.E. Brouwer)
|
|
Subject: Re: 8-bit ASCII for comm.
|
|
Date: 17 Oct 1994 17:21:04 +0100
|
|
|
|
gavrie@pesach.jct.ac.il (Prof. Gavrie Philipson) writes:
|
|
|
|
: Is there any way to display 8-bit ASCII on the Linux console?
|
|
: When I call PC-based BBSes from Linux, I just get rubbish
|
|
: for >127 characters.
|
|
|
|
Well, first of all, there is no such thing as 8-bit ASCII,
|
|
and if there were, then no doubt it would not be what you need.
|
|
You want IBM code page 437 or something similar, I think.
|
|
Try to give the command echo -e '\033(U' before calling
|
|
that BBS.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: grante@reddwarf.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Subject: Re: A badly missed feature in gcc
|
|
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 1994 01:12:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@ahab.eecs.nwu.edu) wrote:
|
|
: In newsgroup: comp.os.linux.development
|
|
:
|
|
: > This is doubtful. The problem is that making this a 'feature' of ANSI c
|
|
: > will all of a sudden make previously syntacticly correct code now fail to
|
|
: > compile or, worse, compile with a different symantic meaning. This woudl
|
|
: > be DISASTEROUS to the attempt to standardize C.
|
|
|
|
: It is *already* put into quite a number of compilers (making it a
|
|
: portability issue already), and anyone writing code that uses that
|
|
: type of constructs should be shot anyway.
|
|
|
|
True, though I suspect that anybody writing code like that has enough
|
|
problems that a bullet wound would go unnoticed. That aside, it is
|
|
fine and proper for you and I to have opinions on what is good style
|
|
and what isn't. I actually enjoy discussing the pro's and con's of
|
|
various "style" questions with other people (like whether it's a good
|
|
idea to have code/data and a comment on the same line).
|
|
|
|
However, it is _not_ acceptable for a compiler to have an "opinion"
|
|
about style. Given sytactically valid source code, it shall parse it
|
|
and generate correct machine code -- no matter how ugly, stupid,
|
|
counter-productive, or obfuscated that source code might be.
|
|
|
|
: It is true there are such cases, but they are throuroughly and
|
|
: completely artificial.
|
|
|
|
If construct X is legal then rest assured that somebody, somewhere,
|
|
has written a real program that relies on that fact. If you've ever
|
|
tried to remove a "useless" feature from a product, you've found this
|
|
out.
|
|
|
|
Me: "But Mr. Customer, the fact that status bit XYZ did that was
|
|
a _bug_ as you should be able to tell by the documentation,
|
|
and now that bug has been fixed."
|
|
|
|
Customer: "I don't care. It used to do that, we depended on it, now
|
|
it doesn't. Fix it back."
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Grant Edwards |Yow! You can't hurt me!! I
|
|
Rosemount Inc. |have an ASSUMABLE MORTGAGE!!
|
|
|
|
|
grante@rosemount.com |
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.development,comp.sys.unix
|
|
From: grante@reddwarf.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
|
|
Subject: Re: We a FAQ: Linux vs. *BSD!!!
|
|
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 1994 01:21:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Jesus Monroy Jr (jmonroy@netcom.com) wrote:
|
|
|
|
: Can we get together and write a single FAQ on this?
|
|
|
|
Probably not...
|
|
|
|
: I propose a single FAQ to answer the question:
|
|
:
|
|
: Which is better Linux or *BSD?
|
|
|
|
You'd be better off with the question:
|
|
|
|
"What are the similarities/differences between Linux and *BSD?"
|
|
|
|
: Do I get a Yeah on this?
|
|
|
|
I won't say Nay, but I suspect that it would be impossible to keep it
|
|
current enough to be useful.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Grant Edwards |Yow! I hope I bought the
|
|
Rosemount Inc. |right relish...
|
|
|zzzzzzzzz...
|
|
grante@rosemount.com |
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: kuehn@citadel.scd.ucar.edu (Jeff Kuehn)
|
|
Subject: Lies, Damned Lies, and Benchmarks (take two)
|
|
Date: 17 Oct 1994 21:34:40 GMT
|
|
|
|
Well, as promised, here's the corrected results for the Byte Magazine UNIX
|
|
benchmark comparing Linux versions 1.0.4 through 1.1.54. As before, I
|
|
haven't run every patchlevel (only 21 of them :-) but I'm willing to run
|
|
individual patchlevels on request, and can provide detailed information on
|
|
each benchmark result for any patchlevel which has been run. (see the data
|
|
for the 1.1.54 run after the table) Please don't send me code which hasn't
|
|
been thoroughly tested... each benchmark requires a kernel build, a reboot
|
|
and an hour to run. I you have code which has been carefully tested, I'm
|
|
willing to benchmark it. Please, send diffs against PL52 (the most recent
|
|
version for which Linus has posted a full source tar).
|
|
|
|
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
The headers in the table below refer to the various tests in the Byte Magazine
|
|
UNIX Benchmark as follows.
|
|
|
|
Versn linux kernel version Ar Arithmetic Test (type = double)
|
|
Dr Dhrystone 2 w/o register vars Exc Execl Throughput Test
|
|
FC1 File Copy (10 seconds) FC3 File Copy (30 seconds)
|
|
FR1 File Read (10 seconds) FR3 File Read (30 seconds)
|
|
FW1 File Write (10 seconds) FW3 File Write (30 seconds)
|
|
Pip Pipe-based Context Switch Test PCT Process Creation Test
|
|
Sh1 Shell scripts (1 concurrent) Sh2 Shell scripts (2 concurrent)
|
|
Sh4 Shell scripts (4 concurrent) Sh8 Shell scripts (8 concurrent)
|
|
Sys System Call Overhead Test PTT Pipe Throughput Test.
|
|
SUM sum of values in row
|
|
|
|
The numbers in the table, represent the ratio of test(pl)/test(1.1.0), Bigger
|
|
numbers indicate better performance. Also note that a pipe throughput test
|
|
has been added.
|
|
|
|
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
Hardware: iNTEL 66MHz 486DX/2
|
|
AMI Enterprise III EISA/VLB Motherboard (AMI BIOS/Chipset)
|
|
256K 4-way set associative writeback cache
|
|
16MB 70ns RAM
|
|
AHA-1742 EISA SCSI host adaptor
|
|
Toshiba MK538 1.2GB SCSI drive
|
|
|
|
Versn |Ar|Dr|Exc|FC1|FC3|FR1|FR3|FW1|FW3|PTT|Pip|PCT|Sh1|Sh2|Sh4|Sh8|Sys|SUM
|
|
1.0.04|1.|1.|1. |1. | .9|1. |1. | .9| .9|1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.7
|
|
1.0.09|1.|1.|1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.8
|
|
1.1.00|1.|1.|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |17.0
|
|
1.1.01|1.|1.|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.9
|
|
1.1.02|1.|1.|1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.9
|
|
1.1.03|1.|1.| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. | .7| .9|1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.1
|
|
1.1.04|1.|1.| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. | .7| .9|1. | .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.1
|
|
1.1.05|1.|1.| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. | .7| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.2
|
|
1.1.10|1.|1.| .9|1.3|1.4|1. |1. | .7| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |17.0
|
|
1.1.15|1.|1.| .9|1.3|1.5|1. |1. | .7| .9|1. |1. |1. | .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |17.0
|
|
1.1.20|1.|1.| .9|1.2|1.4| .9| .8| .6| .8| .9| .9|1. | .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |16.3
|
|
1.1.25|1.|1.| .9|1.2|1.4| .9| .9| .7| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |16.6
|
|
1.1.30|1.|1.| .9|1.2|1.5| .9| .9| .7| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. | .9|1. |1. |16.6
|
|
1.1.35|1.|1.| .9|1.2|1.4| .9| .9| .6| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.5
|
|
1.1.40|1.|1.|1. |1.2|1.3| .8| .8| .6| .8| .9| .6|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. | .9|16.0
|
|
1.1.45|1.|1.|1. |1.2|1.3| .9| .9| .6| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.7
|
|
1.1.50|1.|1.|1. |1.2|1.3| .8| .8| .6| .9| .9| .8| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.4
|
|
1.1.51|1.|1.|1. |1.2|1.3| .8| .8| .6| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. | .9|16.5
|
|
1.1.52|1.|1.|1. |1.3|1.4| .8| .8| .9| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.8
|
|
1.1.53|1.|1.|1. |1.1|1.3| .8| .9| .6| .9| .8| .8|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |1. |16.3
|
|
1.1.54|1.|1.|1. |1.1|1.3| .8| .8| .6| .9| .9| .9|1. |1. |1. |1. |1. | .9|16.2
|
|
|
|
SunOS
|
|
4.1.3 |.5|.4| .1| .9|1.0| .1| .1| .1| .1| .1| .2| .4| .2| .2| .2| .2| .2| 5.1
|
|
(SPARCstation IPC, 24MB RAM, 200MB SCSI drive)
|
|
|
|
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
Here's the data for Linux 1.1.54 vs. the baseline 1.1.0.
|
|
(note: lps==loops/second and lpm==loops/minute).
|
|
|
|
BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 3.11)
|
|
System -- Linux cyberdeck 1.1.54 #5 Sun Oct 16 17:10:43 MDT 1994 i486
|
|
Start Benchmark Run: Sun Oct 16 17:31:47 MDT 1994
|
|
1 interactive users.
|
|
Arithmetic Test (type = double) 5069.1 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Dhrystone 2 without register variables 51635.1 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Read (10 seconds) 94368.0 KBps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Write (10 seconds) 7871.0 KBps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Copy (10 seconds) 1312.0 KBps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Read (30 seconds) 91781.0 KBps (30 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Write (30 seconds) 11640.0 KBps (30 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
File Copy (30 seconds) 1224.0 KBps (30 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Pipe-based Context Switching Test 6796.6 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Pipe Throughput Test 18999.9 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Execl Throughput Test 63.2 lps (9 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Process Creation Test 109.0 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
System Call Overhead Test 29827.4 lps (10 secs, 6 samples)
|
|
Shell scripts (1 concurrent) 98.1 lpm (60 secs, 3 samples)
|
|
Shell scripts (2 concurrent) 51.3 lpm (60 secs, 3 samples)
|
|
Shell scripts (4 concurrent) 26.0 lpm (60 secs, 3 samples)
|
|
Shell scripts (8 concurrent) 13.0 lpm (60 secs, 3 samples)
|
|
|
|
|
|
INDEX VALUES
|
|
TEST BASELINE RESULT INDEX
|
|
|
|
Arithmetic Test (type = double) 5062.4 5069.1 1.0
|
|
Dhrystone 2 without register variables 51685.8 51635.1 1.0
|
|
Execl Throughput Test 64.1 63.2 1.0
|
|
File Copy (10 seconds) 1172.0 1312.0 1.1
|
|
File Copy (30 seconds) 951.0 1224.0 1.3
|
|
File Read (10 seconds) 117544.0 94368.0 0.8
|
|
File Read (30 seconds) 119451.0 91781.0 0.8
|
|
File Write (10 seconds) 12389.0 7871.0 0.6
|
|
File Write (30 seconds) 13393.0 11640.0 0.9
|
|
Pipe Throughput Test 21779.3 18999.9 0.9
|
|
Pipe-based Context Switching Test 7620.8 6796.6 0.9
|
|
Process Creation Test 112.2 109.0 1.0
|
|
Shell scripts (1 concurrent) 97.1 98.1 1.0
|
|
Shell scripts (2 concurrent) 51.0 51.3 1.0
|
|
Shell scripts (4 concurrent) 26.0 26.0 1.0
|
|
Shell scripts (8 concurrent) 12.6 13.0 1.0
|
|
System Call Overhead Test 31504.0 29827.4 0.9
|
|
=========
|
|
SUM of 17 items 16.2
|
|
AVERAGE 1.0
|
|
|
|
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
|
|
|
Observations:
|
|
|
|
0) My Linux (home) system soundly stomps the stuffings out of my SunOS
|
|
(work) system in terms of performance... by about a factor of three.
|
|
|
|
1) The scheduler, while not perfect, is better than first estimated due to
|
|
the awk(1)/time(1) problems in the first benchmark.
|
|
|
|
2) The I/O performance is pretty touch-and-go with a lot of variation in the
|
|
numbers. IMHO, since the benchmark ran almost entirely in memory, the
|
|
problem lies above the device drivers, probably in either the buffer
|
|
cache code or filesystem code. It has already been suggested (by Eric)
|
|
that the problem could lie in the memory allocation which is heavily used
|
|
by the buffer cache. Were this the case, I think I would expect to see
|
|
the File Read tests showing more problems than the File Write tests. The
|
|
opposite was true -- File Write did more poorly than File Read. I'd like
|
|
to hear more discussion on this. File Write dropped off at 1.1.3 and
|
|
File Read dropped off between 1.1.15 and 1.1.20 (remember these numbers).
|
|
|
|
3) Somewhere between 1.1.15 and 1.1.35 the File Copy test did the best and
|
|
since dropped off a bit. Again, most of this happened in cache on my
|
|
machine, so IMHO this doesn't represent device driver performance, but
|
|
rather reflects the performance of filesystem/buffer cache and associated
|
|
algorithms.
|
|
|
|
4) Pipes seem to have become more expensive to use (Pipe-based Context
|
|
Switching Test and Pipe Throughput Test) since somewhere between 1.1.15
|
|
and 1.1.20. Could this be another symptom of whatever happened to File
|
|
Read between 1.1.15 and 1.1.20?
|
|
|
|
5) System call overhead is up a little as well since somewhere between
|
|
1.1.35 and 1.1.40.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff Kuehn
|
|
Scientific Computing Division
|
|
National Center For Atmospheric Research
|
|
Boulder, Colorado USA
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org (Joerg Mertin)
|
|
Subject: Re: ext2fs vs. Berkeley FFS
|
|
Date: 16 Oct 1994 10:09:38 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org
|
|
|
|
In comp.os.linux.development Theodore Ts'o (tytso@MIT.EDU) wrote:
|
|
: From: mike@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Mike Haertel)
|
|
: Date: 03 Oct 1994 20:46:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
[...] Stuff deleted
|
|
|
|
: In any case, it's a good idea to optimize for the common case, not the
|
|
: exception case. Thus, I believe ext2fs made a pretty good tradeoff.
|
|
: Not doing syncronous meta-data writes gives the ext2fs a blinding speed
|
|
: advantage over the FFS. From my experience with both FFS and ext2fs,
|
|
: ext2fs is just as reliable --- if not more --- than FFS in surviving
|
|
: unclean shutdowns.
|
|
|
|
That's right. I would say, under Xwindows I have better chances of
|
|
saving unclosed files than under MSWindog while editing a file and
|
|
having a system-Crash (Which happens once all 2 houres).
|
|
In fact, I never loosed any file with ext2fs since I use it. And my
|
|
first release was 0.2 :-) Just Good.
|
|
Thanks to all developers of this fs !
|
|
|
|
Just my 2 cents :^)
|
|
--
|
|
Solong & Happy Hacking
|
|
************************************************************************
|
|
* Joerg Mertin : smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org (Home) *
|
|
* in Berlin Spandau at : jorgagif@w203zrz.zrz.tu-berlin.de *
|
|
* Stardust's Linux System : Data, Fax & Voice 49 30 3615569 *
|
|
************************************************************************
|
|
`Fatal Error: Found [MS-Windows] System -> Terminating Virus...'
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org (Joerg Mertin)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
|
|
Subject: Re: Question about ext2fs
|
|
Date: 16 Oct 1994 18:06:37 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org
|
|
|
|
In article <1994Oct11.150318.28373@news.cs.indiana.edu>, "Eric Jeschke" <jeschke@cs.indiana.edu> writes:
|
|
: |> Can someone with some knowledge of the ext2fs internals tell me
|
|
: |> how intensive the disk activity is to certain blocks like the
|
|
: |> superblock and inode bitmap blocks? extfs is working fine, but
|
|
: |> I'm afraid I have a poor quality disk (Seagate) that is not able
|
|
: |> to handle the intense repeated disk activity to these blocks.
|
|
|
|
: |> I am slowly developing bad blocks on various inode bitmap blocks
|
|
: |> (and now the superblock). The kernel complains about getting a
|
|
: |> "short read" on those blocks. I am able to map them out successfully
|
|
: |> using the -L option with ext2fs and the system recovers admirably,
|
|
: |> but sooner or later the problem recurs with another block. The
|
|
: |> latest victim is the superblock on the root partition. I am able
|
|
: |> to e2fsck the partition using the -b 8193 option and averything seems
|
|
: |> fine, however the system fails to mount it at bootup even though
|
|
: |> I added sb=8193 to the mount options in /etc/fstab for /.
|
|
: |>
|
|
: |> How can I successfully boot from this partition now?
|
|
|
|
Well, I've recently made such an experience on my system with an
|
|
ST1480A Seagate 420 MB Harddisk. The only thing to do was to make a
|
|
backup, getting a low-level Formating & Testing programm from seagate
|
|
and test the entire disk so the Disk-Controller could remmap all
|
|
bad-Blocks found. After it, all worked well again, but this should't
|
|
happen anyway. I noticed it, since I had a bad block on one Startup
|
|
File, so I had to fix this problem :^<
|
|
|
|
cu.
|
|
--
|
|
Solong & Happy Hacking
|
|
************************************************************************
|
|
* Joerg Mertin : smurphy@stardust.bln.sub.org (Home) *
|
|
* in Berlin Spandau at : jorgagif@w203zrz.zrz.tu-berlin.de *
|
|
* Stardust's Linux System : Data, Fax & Voice 49 30 3615569 *
|
|
************************************************************************
|
|
`Fatal Error: Found [MS-Windows] System -> Terminating Virus...'
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: cs_kokim@dmf123.ust.hk (Tall Sword)
|
|
Subject: wxWindows 1.50k shared lib wanted
|
|
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 1994 07:48:50 GMT
|
|
|
|
I have compiled wxWindows 1.50k in my Linux box and found it quite useful
|
|
for developing cross platform GUI program. But the wxWindows 1.50k only
|
|
generate a static lib for me and it make the executable file quite large
|
|
and the time of compiling is longer too.
|
|
|
|
Anyone else where got a copy of shared lib of wxWindows 1.50k? I realized
|
|
that there is copy in sunsite that support shared lib but that version is
|
|
older that only support XView 3.1. Please direct me to the right site and
|
|
directories to get the shared lib.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
* Origin: TallSword, Computer Science Year 2, HKUST
|
|
internet: cs_kokim@dmf123.ust.hk, cs_kokim@stu.ust.hk
|
|
root@dmf123.ust.hk, raymond@dmf123.ust.hk
|
|
Raymond.Ko@f15.n700.z6.ftn.air.org
|
|
fidonet: Raymond Ko, 6:700/15@fidonet.org
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
|
|
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Development-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Development@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
|
|
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
|
|
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Development Digest
|
|
******************************
|