| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2009 19:34:28 +0100 From: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> To: Ron Peterson <rpeterso@...olyoke.edu> Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: old/new ext3 compatibility > 2009-03-19_14:45:02-0400 rpeterso: > > As I understand it, debian lenny's ext3 filesystem uses 256 byte inodes, > > to be forward compatible with ext4. > > > > I have a production server running debian etch. It is attached to a > > fiber channel array, on which it has several ext3 filesystems. I'm > > installing a new server, and I'd like to use lenny. It will be attached > > to the same array, and I'd like to be able to occasionally use the ext3 > > filesystems created previously. Ideally, I'd also like to go the other > > direction as well. Is this possible, or just crazy talk? > > If I understand what I'm reading correctly, this is a non-problem. Any > recent 2.6 kernel should understand ext3 filesystems with 256 byte > inodes just fine. The only thing that has happened is that the latest > debian stable defaults to using 256 byte inodes rather than 128. Is > that correct? Are there any gotcha's here that I should be aware of? Yes. Any 2.6 kernel will understand both inode sizes. It is just a matter of a default in mkfs. Larger inodes allow for more effective handling of extended attributes, ACLs and such but waste more space/throughput in case you don't use them... Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz> SuSE CR Labs -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists