You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
at least, i left pleasantly. that's not bad for stupid. http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=50501
he was right. it was just about two weeks. i think it was the 20 instances of "console-kit-daemon" that finally drove me back.
last time i had arch installed, i tried xfs. this time, i'm going with reiserfs and hope it will be the killer file system it's reputed to be (b'dum-ching!).
Offline
<plug> Go jfs!! </plug>
I think this is the filesystem to beat. It is not very cpu intensive which is nice for older computers as well as virtualbox/vmware sessions.
Check me out on twitter!!! twitter.com/The_Ringmaster
Offline
I would suggesst ext 3. Check out this post http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=12865
---for there is nothing either good or bad, but only thinking makes it so....
Hamlet, W Shakespeare
Offline
it's a done deal. i had already set it up with reiser before i started this thread.
Offline
it's a done deal. i had already set it up with reiser before i started this thread.
Good choice. Pacman and reiserfs seem to get along particularly well.
Last edited by fwojciec (2008-06-28 05:21:13)
Offline
fuscia wrote:it's a done deal. i had already set it up with reiser before i started this thread.
Good choice. Pacman and reiserfs seem to get along particularly well.
Ye... I used to have my arch on ext3 but then my 7 years old hdd just stopped working and When I reinstalled arch (good think I kept all my valuable info on my usb hdd, cause I couldn't save anything...)
I chose reiserfs and there was a HUUUUGE improvement in pacman's db search and etc...
My victim you are meant to be
No, you cannot hide nor flee
You know what I'm looking for
Pleasure your torture, I will endure...
Offline
Fuscia! Welcome back. They all come back, but we are especially glad to see you.
Offline
Yeah I use reiserfs on my laptop, which has a 4200RPM ATA hard disk in it that was very slow on NTFS when it ran Windows. Now I use Arch on a reiserfs partition and things are much much faster. It was a smarter move than replacing the drive for a faster one; a faster drive would drain the battery life too much.
My Rigs:
- Mid-2007 iMac 20", Intel 2GHz Core 2 Duo, 2x1GB DDR2-800, 250GB SATA HDD, and...MIGHTY MOUSE!!! , OSX 10.5 Leopard, ATI Radeon 2400XT 128MB
- HP zv6203cl, AMD Athlon 64 3200 S939, 2x512MB DDR400, 80GB 4200rpm HDD, ATI Radeon Xpress 200M 128MB, Arch i686
- 1986 Gibson SG Junior Cherry Red, Ibanez 15W amp, DigiTech RP250 modeling processor
Offline
Fuscia! Welcome back. They all come back, but we are especially glad to see you.
*sniff* gosh, thanks. it's nice to be back.
Offline
<plug> Go jfs!! </plug>
I think this is the filesystem to beat. It is not very cpu intensive which is nice for older computers as well as virtualbox/vmware sessions.
JFS is really efficient (especially with deadline elevator, I guess) but it has its own issues. For instance when I experience an outage or just have to use RESET button after X server crashes unexpectedly while playing Quick Time related video file (three times recently), then I have some strange problems like losing (randomly) some of my system/KDE settings Never saw this on EXT3...
"... being a Linux user is sort of like living in a house inhabited by a large family of carpenters and architects. Every morning when you wake up, the house is a little different. Maybe there is a new turret, or some walls have moved. Or perhaps someone has temporarily removed the floor under your bed."
MSI Raider GE78HX 13VI-032PL
Offline
*sniff* gosh, thanks. it's nice to be back.
Bah, I suppose this means you're going to want your stapler back.
Smarter than a speeding bullet
My Goodreads profile
Offline
fuscia wrote:*sniff* gosh, thanks. it's nice to be back.
Bah, I suppose this means you're going to want your stapler back.
"please, may i have my 'tapler back?"
Offline
Offline
Pages: 1