Re: CD writing in ext2 filesystem

[Steven Smith <sos22@cam.ac.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1439 bytes --]

> >   > Is there a particular reason why you were trying to put an ext2 fiole
> >   > system on the CD rather than an ISO9660 one?
...
> > But the main advantage (of using ext2) is that you get a
> > filesystem which is the same as your native system. Permissions,
> > ownership, symlinks, pipes, device files..... (all the great features
> > of ext2) get taken care of. Most of the above would
> > not be possible with iso9660. The Rockridge extensions handle them
> > well. However it too has a problem with the maximum depth
> > of a directory tree.
> UUM, excuse me for only thinking, but, if one creates a tarball and then 
> burns it to a cd, one then has the same, or am i missing something here.?????
You'll get everything he listed, but ext2 has a few exotic features that
tar doesn't:

1) ACLs and EAs (if you have the patches from acl.bestbits.at)
2) HURD translator and author data
3) Sparse files
4) The noatime, sync, append only, compressed, nodump, immutable, journaled,
secure delete, and undeletable attributes.

Very few of these are generally useful, and numbers 1 and 4 need unusual
patches to use fully, but they are there for a reason, and most tars
don't support them. Plus, in the future, we're likely to get multiple
file forks, which really will need backing up.

Burning an ext2 image onto a CD is a strange thing to do, but not without
its merit.

Steven Smith,
sos22@cam.ac.uk.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]