Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ubuntu +ext4 why?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ubuntu +ext4 why?

    As it is mentioned in the release notes, ext4 has a severe data destroying bug,

    Ubuntu was released with this broken filesystem anyway, phoronix uses this broken filesystem in its tests and people even use it, probably without knowing.

    But what the hell - why? Why are ubuntu devs so idiotic braindead to release a distro version with a filesystem that will screw up users? Why isn't there any mention of this on phoronix?

    Why?

    How was is it possible that the crap called ext4 was ever declared 'stable' in the first place?

  • #2
    Do you mean this: http://www.h-online.com/open/news/it...t4-740467.html ? That's not a bug at all.

    Ext4 was adopted by Fedora a generation before Ubuntu wasn't it? The decision was made that its stable, and I agree with that. I've tested ext4 for over a year now. Unless you're talking about some other bug.

    Comment


    • #3
      Fedora is a testbed for pre-alpha crap and broken by design. They have other goals than a distribution ment for desktop users.

      I refer to Ubuntu's own release notes:
      http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/releasenotes/910

      Possible corruption of large files with ext4 filesystem

      There have been some reports of data corruption with fresh (not upgraded) ext4 file systems using the Ubuntu 9.10 kernel when writing to large files (over 512MB). The issue is under investigation, and if confirmed will be resolved in a post-release update. Users who routinely manipulate large files may want to consider using ext3 file systems until this issue is resolved. (453579)


      the link you brought is a completly different problem. It is/was another sign that ext4 is tuned for benchmarks and does not care about your data.

      Nobody should use ext4.

      Comment


      • #4
        AFAICT from looking at the Launchpad comments, none of the 3 (?) people who reported actually seeing this bug have reported running CPU/memory tests, and nobody else has been able to reproduce it. It's probably only in the release notes to cover Canonical's ass.

        Comment

        Working...
        X