5 ms·
I didn't even know there was a sysv file system... when I first started using Linux, I think my choices were ext2, fat, or ufs.
by nubinetwork 4y ago
I didn't even know there was a sysv file system... when I first started using Linux, I think my choices were ext2, fat, or ufs.
- skissane 4y agoI remember using the Minix filesystem on floppies. ext{,2} was a bit too heavyweight for a floppy. And UMSDOS on my MS-DOS6.22/Wfw3.11 FAT16 partition. And HPFS so I could mount my OS/2 2.0 partition (EMX on the Hobbes OS/2 CD-ROM was my gateway drug to Linux.) xiafs sounded intriguing, but I never actually used it. Of all the filesystems currently in the mainline Linux kernel, the most useless (surely) must be BFS (not BeFS) – https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/filesystems/bfs.html https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/filesystems/bfs.html
- da_chicken 4y agoHey, I support a system that 4 complete rewrites ago used BFS!
- chasil 4y agoThere was also Minix, used in the very early days.
- slondr 4y agoIsn’t minix shipped with every x86_64 cpu these days? I thought it was one of the most deployed operating systems ever
- chasil 4y agoI think Android beats MINIX. The file system used isn't accessible, so issues aren't directly applicable.
- SoftTalker 4y agoMy undergrad operating systems class used Minix
- SoftTalker 4y agoEven today, Open BSD use FFS. You can mount ext2/3/4 and FAT but pretty sure only FFS is supported for the root file system.