xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Stability of the Red Hat 7.1 + XFS system

To: Micah Yoder <yodermk@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Stability of the Red Hat 7.1 + XFS system
From: Juha Saarinen <juha@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:24:50 +1200 (NZST)
Cc: "linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <0106111510250C.01070@eclipse>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Micah Yoder wrote:

> It's an Abit VP6 motherboard.  I've heard good reports from it, so that
> *better* not be the problem!!!

Well, check the Linux mailing lists -- reading those, and having battled
with a Tyan Tiger 133 for ages now, I would be extremely hesistant depend
on anything with a VIA chip set onboard. I'm sure that they'll get it
right at some point, but at the moment, stability and reliability still
seems to equal Intel, and then preferably a 440BX chip set.

(I know about Intel's past chip set gaffes, so no flames, please.)


> But what is the kernel shipped on the CD compiled with?  That's what I'm
> using. I know Red Hat uses 2.96 to compile their kernel, so I dunno if SGI
> did the same.

I believe it's 2.91-66 for XFS 1.0.

> I think I'm starting to lean toward telling them to install the latest stable
> Debian with ext2......  :-)

FreeBSD with UFS and Softupdates might not be such a bad idea. IMO it's
more work to manage a FreeBSD system, however, so don't jump into it until
you understand it.

-- 
Regards,


Juha

PGP fingerprint:
B7E1 CC52 5FCA 9756 B502  10C8 4CD8 B066 12F3 9544


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>