[9fans] a disk filesystem for both Plan 9 and Linux?

[John Floren]

I'd like to be able to use a disk in both Plan 9 and Linux. FAT seems
to have some issues with sufficiently large partitions, so that's out.
Plan9Port doesn't have fossil in the repo, although I've found
patches. ext2srv may be an option, but I have no idea how reliable it
would actually be.

Am I missing any options for filesystems that are supported by both
Linux and Plan 9? Can anyone comment on the reliability/usefulness of
ext2srv?


john

[Sergey Zhilkin]

Hi !

It's useless, even from contrib/iru

Post by John Floren
I'd like to be able to use a disk in both Plan 9 and Linux. FAT seems
to have some issues with sufficiently large partitions, so that's out.
Plan9Port doesn't have fossil in the repo, although I've found
patches. ext2srv may be an option, but I have no idea how reliable it
would actually be.
Am I missing any options for filesystems that are supported by both
Linux and Plan 9? Can anyone comment on the reliability/usefulness of
ext2srv?
john

[c***@gmx.de]

i think fat is still the best option, even tho it has these limitations.
virtually every operating system can deal with fat, and the implementations
are robust and tolerant to errors because they are pretty much expected.

ext2srv doesnt support jurnaling.

--
cinap

[John Floren]

Post by c***@gmx.de
i think fat is still the best option, even tho it has these limitations.
virtually every operating system can deal with fat, and the implementations
are robust and tolerant to errors because they are pretty much expected.
ext2srv doesnt support jurnaling.
--
cinap

Someone mentioned that 9front has a 32-bit FAT implementation, is that
right? If so, it would probably be the best contender.

john

[John Floren]

dossrv always had fat32 support. you'r probably refering to disk/format,
9bootfat and pbs which do support fat32 now in 9front.
--
cinap

Thanks, you're entirely right, I was thinking of disk/format.

john

[Bruce Ellis]

I noticed the other day that I was offered exFAT when formatting a 2T drive
on windows 7. I know nothing about it except the sample space of reading
one page on the web. Any insights? Is this FAT48 or something newish and
compatible in some transfinite sense.

brucee

Post by John Floren

dossrv always had fat32 support. you'r probably refering to disk/format,
9bootfat and pbs which do support fat32 now in 9front.
--
cinap

Thanks, you're entirely right, I was thinking of disk/format.
john

[c***@gmx.de]

from the wikipedia article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExFAT

Microsoft has not released the official exFAT file system specification,
and a restrictive license from Microsoft is required in order to make and
distribute exFAT implementations. Microsoft also asserts patents on exFAT
which make it impossible to re-implement its functionality in a compatible
way without violating a large percentage of them.

the article links a pdf with some reverse engineered info. that should be
enougth to implement it. the principle is the same as fat. but its not
clear how one can get this license from microsoft.

--
cinap

[c***@gmx.de]

dossrv always had fat32 support. you'r probably refering to disk/format,
9bootfat and pbs which do support fat32 now in 9front.

--
cinap

[Iruatã Souza]

If you ever mount an extN partition with ext2fs, always remember to
unmount it before reboot/shutdown. I remember having trouble with
that.

Post by John Floren
I'd like to be able to use a disk in both Plan 9 and Linux. FAT seems
to have some issues with sufficiently large partitions, so that's out.
Plan9Port doesn't have fossil in the repo, although I've found
patches. ext2srv may be an option, but I have no idea how reliable it
would actually be.
Am I missing any options for filesystems that are supported by both
Linux and Plan 9? Can anyone comment on the reliability/usefulness of
ext2srv?
john

[Richard Miller]

Somebody recently reported a problem with ext2srv not working when
directories are huge enough to need an indirect block. I don't
think anybody's fixed that.

Newer extN filesystems have a configurable inode size (the superblock
says what the actual size is). I have a patch to deal with this,
but it's not very thoroughly tested. Contact me if you want it.

[Peter A. Cejchan]

Yes. It was me. For the timer being, I tar the dirs w/too many files in.
Would be glad to have that patch.

Thanks,

++pac

Post by Richard Miller
Somebody recently reported a problem with ext2srv not working when
directories are huge enough to need an indirect block. I don't
think anybody's fixed that.
Newer extN filesystems have a configurable inode size (the superblock
says what the actual size is). I have a patch to deal with this,
but it's not very thoroughly tested. Contact me if you want it.

[Richard Miller]

Post by Peter A. Cejchan
Would be glad to have that patch.

/n/sources/contrib/miller/ext2srv.tar

Besides dealing with configurable-sized inodes, it allows you to
mount a 'not clean' fs read-only, instead of refusing to mount
at all.

Sorry it doesn't fix the directory-indirect-block bug.