From the page: Content: Linux File Systems .. which is a misnomer because Linux supports virtually all file systems. Please Fix -- I talk too much, make it look professional after the discussion has served it's purpose.
virtually all filesystems? :)
Yes, it supports a lot, but there are old ones that have been dropped, e.g. ext1, future new ones like WinFS and lots more strange proprietary systems (specially on weird embedded devices and flashmem cards).
I think it would be best to have a page called "filesystems' that just explaing what a filesystem is, and a page called "Linux filesystems" that lists the ones that linux supports. Jor 18:13, Mar 9, 2004 (EST)
ext2 is wrongly classified under journaling, but I do not know what other category it belongs to (nor could i find it on the web). Does extended filesystems and the ilk need their own section??? as ext2 should definitely not go under misc.
My last point is do we need to be categorised into these sections as they are only relevant to people who have an understanding of filesystems really (except journalling section). So why not classify each filesystem in its own descriptive page. Perhaps historical categories reflecting the relationships between the filesystems???
Geniarse 07:59, Mar 10, 2004 (EST)
I have created a quick draft for ext2 description, this is to serve as my proposal for each filesystems details page (more technical information needs adding, I would prefer on a seperate page but what do other people think).
p.s this new layout is excellent, exactly what is needed in my mind.
Geniarse 12:59, Mar 10, 2004 (EST)
Does seem to fit the pattern. But I think we have approximately 1,298,376 redirects to variations on that theme. That one seems to be open though.
Digiot 02:08, Mar 20, 2004 (EST)
- The reason why I mention it is that I think I moved it there and it ended up back at this title - but it could be my rather poor memory. Moving again. :) Dysprosia 07:42, Mar 20, 2004 (EST)