| 1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:47:01 -0500 |
| 3 |
> Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Mick wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> You will need to patch your kernel (in your sdb test OS) and then |
| 7 |
>>> you will also need to make a reiser4 fs on your sdb partition(s) |
| 8 |
>>> (for that you'll need to emerge sys-fs/reiser4progs). If you want |
| 9 |
>>> to be able to mount reiser4 from within your sda OS, you will need |
| 10 |
>>> of course to patch your current kernel to start with, alternatively |
| 11 |
>>> use a LiveCD like sysrescue which comes already patched. For |
| 12 |
>>> patches look in here: |
| 13 |
>>> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/edward/reiser4/reiser4-for-2.6/ |
| 14 |
>>> The way I do what you are trying to do is start with the existing |
| 15 |
>>> OS on sda, partition sdb, tar contents of sda partitions into |
| 16 |
>>> corresponding sdb partitions and then modify fstab. Depending on |
| 17 |
>>> what you want to test you may not need grub installed into sdb's |
| 18 |
>>> MBR and you may not need a /boot in sdb. As long as you are not |
| 19 |
>>> going to remove sda from the machine you should be able to add a |
| 20 |
>>> couple of lines in the original grub.conf to select to |
| 21 |
>>> boot /dev/sdb, while using sda's MBR and /boot partition. HTH. |
| 22 |
>> I could have swore reiserfs4 was in the kernel. Sure enough, it |
| 23 |
>> ain't. I'll wait then. I don't want to take the chance that |
| 24 |
>> something goes belly up then not have a bootable way to fix things. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> reiser4 was never in the kernel and the odds of it ever making it there |
| 27 |
> were about zero (coding style issues and many other things that pissed |
| 28 |
> Linux off). And that was in the days when Hans was physically located |
| 29 |
> in a place where he was allowed to code. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> For all practical purposes Reiser4 is dead. I haven't heard a peep out |
| 32 |
> of anyone claiming to maintain it for a few years now. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
New question. I'm playing with LVM. What is the best file system to |
| 36 |
use that with? I know LVM can shrink and grow so a file system should |
| 37 |
be able to do the same, online would be great but not required. That |
| 38 |
would be good for a / partition but not needed for the rest. I can |
| 39 |
always go to single user and resize things. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I don't want XFS tho. I used it before and it was a total disaster. I |
| 42 |
have a UPS but I also recall having to pull the plug when hal showed up |
| 43 |
too. No need for a repeat. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Hmm, maybe I am thinking of ext4? Life's confusing. :/ |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
Dale |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
:-) :-) |
Archives