Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Ubuntu +ext4 why?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,731

    Default 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. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    378

    Default

    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.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,731

    Default

    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.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    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.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •