[patch] Re: SU+J on 9.1-RC2 ISO

[Ian Lepore]

On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 09:08 -0500, Mark Felder wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 20:00:27 +0100
> Bas Smeelen <b.smeelen at ose.nl> wrote:
> 
> > Though the last 10 years I have not had the inconvenience of having to 
> > deal with long fsck' s or bgfsck' s on servers or workstation installs, 
> > so I think this should not be default on new installs.
> 
> This is one man's opinion. On the other hand, SUJ by default is a godsend for me because of the number of crashes/fscks I've been dealing with.

So SUJ has been a godsend for you.  I don't see anything in your
statement that supports it being the default.

Given how much trouble it has been for people in the past, I don't plan
to embrace journaling any faster than I embraced softupdates originally.
That is to say, it will be years before I use it.  

I suspect my attitude on this isn't all that uncommon, and is likely the
explanation for why things increasingly become the default before their
time these days.  Developers are motivated to push new features into
wide use quickly, because that gets the new features lots of testing.
Prudent users aren't interested in being guinea pigs, and will push
back.

-- Ian