OT-ish: fedora->crash->single user fsck; FreeBSD->crash->smooth recovery

[Wojciech Puchar]

> Just unacceptable for a laptop.  No flash in firefox, I hate flash,
> but it's crippling not to have.

i don't have. nothing lost.


> Lots of unsupported hardware, etc. [I

simply buy COMPATIBLE hardware like IBM/Lenovo.


> observe, it just doesn't crash (unless I plug in a weird flash drive,
> camera, etc., and I shouldn't be plugging those things into my servers
> anyway).  Yea FreeBSD!  Fedora has crashed at least 5 times in one

Just once a day is considered "stable" in linux world today.

> One other thought on FreeBSD vs. Fedora: dudes, rpm dependencies are
> junk (or put differently, our ports maintainers are saints)!  Every

at least when i used linux some years ago there was many distros and every 
usable distro (like debian or slackware) used other package format, yes 
rpm was (is?) unusable.

> engender riddicule - linux is dumbbed down almost as bad as windows,

i would object this. linux goal is to compete with windows. and it 
competes excellent. it is even worse.

linux is for people that want to show they are  "better" than his/her 
friends so they use "better" operating system.

at least in Poland, where linux users often presents themselves as 
"experts" to others.

> Ok, I'll quit ranting and actually ask a question: The real big thing
> that suprised me (about Fedora), is that every damn time it crashes, I
> have to sit through 20 minutes of fsck when it boots, then it cries,
> gags, and throws me into a root console to run fsck again, manually,
> for 20 more minutes.  I'm thinking about symlinking fsck to a rather
> dirtier word on the Fedora box.

yes it is normal.

linux filesystem works like in -o async mode, is just caches what it have 
to write and write whenever it likes at whatever sequence.

in linux it is always presented as feature not bug.


another very stupid thing is TOO delayed writes, i mean linux simply 
caches things as long as there are free memory then just starts lots of 
writes at once efectively halting the system for a while.

> probably crashed my FreeBSD boxes 10-50 times, and it always boots
> right up and does an fsck in the background.  So compare, one manual

same on my systems. UFS is designed to survive crashes.

> to ditch Fedora and spend the time sending logs to freebsd-acpi,
> manually configuring amd, etc, etc...
>
> Is ext2/3 really that bad?
>
i don't know ext3, it in theory does journalling, are you using ext3 or 
ext2?

hint: ext3 is actually ext2 with extra file created, there is no need to 
convert, just run fsck_ext3 to convert to ext3, and delete that file to 
convert to ext2.


if this journalling really work i don't know.