> > If that's the case, then why do you care? Naively, I wouldn't
> > think this is a big deal. Why am I wrong?
> Because (a) existing Linux installations expect to mount the
> root filesystem readonly until basic consistency checking has
> been done; and (b) after a cold reboot, the filesystem will
> need recovery before it can be mounted.
Ahhh. Now I see.
The root fs is *always* cycling back and forth
between read-write and read-only. So after
nearly every crash, the root filesystem will be both
unstable (ie, potentially inconsistent) *and* RO.