No announcement yet.

ChromeOS Drops Support For EXT2/EXT3/EXT4 File-Systems

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
    Couldn't have they added support for renaming in ext4? Isn't it open source? But then again ntfs is good enough. Since 90% of the desktops already run ntfs it might be a good idea to also move a new OS to ntfs to ensure best compatibility.
    you are kidding, arn't you?!?!

    ntfs is one of the worst fielsystems out there. broken by design and patched to ridiculisness.

    beside of that, am did i missed something or is chrom still running on ext4 as they only intend to drop ext4 support for EXTERNAL mounts?


    • #32
      Create an account on Google's bug report system

      If thousands of us all create bugs saying that our EXT* drives do not work(and yes, I mean separate reports) do you think Google would get the message?


      • #33
        Originally posted by Luke_Wolf View Post
        Originally posted by chrisb View Post
        The operating system that got 21% of the US laptop market last year is irrelevant?
        He is probably referring to a report from market research firm NPD:
        The 21 percent are however not from all notebook sales, but only from the commercial channel.
        Originally posted by Licaon View Post
        They'll reconsider maybe, see #101:
        These words could have been taken verbatim from a marketing manual. They are trying to placate users without committing to anything. ChromeOS 39 will come without ext4 support, and bringing it back for 40 is a long shot. So we are looking at 3-6 months until ext4 support is restored, if they start working on it immediately.
        Last edited by chithanh; 12 October 2014, 04:57 PM.


        • #34
          Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
          Not supporting your beloved ext4 isn't exactly evil. They are free to choose whatever file system they want for THEIR OS.
          it is evil, by so many reasons. being free to choose what you want doesn't make it less evil.
          i am actually nearly speechless.

          sure, fat and ntfs are the most common filesystems under the masses. but giving up on the by miles far better filesystem supports just to keep up this crap not only gives the fals signal, it even makes things for all worse on the long run. it is even more stupid considering that they keep fat and ntfs which are licenced by one of the biggest adversary.


          • #35
            The fully supported file-systems endorsed by Google would be FAT and NTFS.
            A pity I don't have third hand for a triple facepalm...


            • #36
              "let's drop support for ext2/3/4. Unnecessary features like this make it difficult to implement a feature that matters"

              Wow, just wow. Regardless if "external mount" or not, I mean, either way you need the same kernel code (compiled in or maybe as module if you dare). Why the bloody hell do they pretend they have to care about ext-Code? Or are they sooooo far away from upstream that they are totally incompatible?

              To me, actually, this sound like a Windows developer who hasn't heard of Linux before and says "oh, let's drop that strange thing over there, nobody knows what it is good for anyway".

              Even I, as Gentoo user, configuring and compiling my kernels to keep them in shape and slender (and not have a ridiculous initrd), would never drop support for such an important and standard file system. It is surely arguable if people need smth. like squashfs support by default activated but ext?
              It doesn't harm and what kind of trouble could it cause to keep ext4? The code is surely not wasting gigabytes of SSD space once compiled. And since ext4 code should be maintained by upstream...

              And what are their "features that matter"? Shoving up more money MS's backside?

              Um Aunt Edith says:
              Somebody on /. speculates that this might be also "pushing users toward cloud storage, specifically Google Drive."
              Well. Cloud storage. Horrible thought.
              Comfortable sometimes, but only if you have a good connection. But insecure as hell. NSA, fappenings, all the mess that happened. Still people propagate cloud usage.
              Last edited by Adarion; 12 October 2014, 05:17 PM.
              Stop TCPA, stupid software patents and corrupt politicians!


              • #37
                Originally posted by Master5000 View Post
                Not supporting your beloved ext4 isn't exactly evil. They are free to choose whatever file system they want for THEIR OS.
                Well it's there - thus giving people choice. Removing choice without (good) reason is really nasty the way I see it.
                Now I will admit that I perhaps was a bit fast. Dropping support may noe be the same as preventing usage, but who knows!
                I think it would have been better if they fixed the problem they are complaining about and contribute back instead.



                • #38
                  so what

                  The only point of chromebooks is to install Linux on them anyway.


                  • #39
                    Even though ChromeOS uses parts of Linux, I'm sure Google doesn't want people to associate it with Linux. Personally if I got a ChromeBook, I'd try my best to put Linux. Be the only reason I get one. ChromeOS sucks. I can do a lot more with Ubuntu or Debian.


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by fagzal View Post
                      The only point of chromebooks is to install Linux on them anyway.
                      Yup, anyone who is tech savvy is installing Linux on it anyway. This whole issue is completely pointless. My daughter uses my Chromebook in Chrome OS for school, but the likelihood of her ever needing access to anything but a FAT or NTFS formatted disk is incredibly unlikely. If they want to make them more useful to the non-tech population, they should try to build in HFS+ access for drives formatted on a Mac.