Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ext4 Advances As Interim Step To Btrfs

Posted by kdawson on from the butter-is-better dept.

Heise.de's Kernel Log has a look at the ext4 filesystem as Linus Torvalds has integrated a large collection of patches for it into the kernel main branch. "This signals that with the next kernel version 2.6.28, the successor to ext3 will finally leave behind its 'hot' development phase." The article notes that ext4 developer Theodore Ts'o (tytso) is in favor of ultimately moving Linux to a modern, "next-generation" file system. His preferred choice is btrfs, and Heise notes an email Ts'o sent to the Linux Kernel Mailing List a week back positioning ext4 as a bridge to btrfs.

10 of 510 comments (clear)

  1. BTRFS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So it incorporates compression by vowel ommission? Brllnt!

  2. I can't believe... by arrenlex · · Score: 5, Funny

    Butter FS? Are you kidding me?

    Here is your first official list of jokes. Please contribute.

    1. You're still running ext4? I can't believe it's not ButterFS!
    2. But will it run on toast?
    3. Will fsck be renamed to butterknife?
    4. If your system overheats will your filesystem melt?
    5. If you use ButterFS too much, will it turn into FAT?
    6. If you leave ButterFS on your volume too long, will your hard drive start to reek?
    7. Will the next version of ButterFS be called GoatButterFS, just like the next version of Leopard is Snow Leopard?
    8. "Tough" notebooks will never have their hard drives formatted with ButterFS, because if you dropped them, they would always land hard drive down.
    9. When you submit your dead ButterFS hard drive to a data recovery centre, will they have an intern lick it to get the data off instead of putting it under a read head?

    These are getting kind of desperate -- your turn now.

    Honestly, what is it with FOSS and crappy names? (looking at you, gimp)

    1. Re:I can't believe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      These are getting kind of desperate -- your turn now.

      Yeah, you're spreading yourself a bit thin.

      • I hear some of the features in btrfs have been refined from ext3cow.
      • I touch'd a file on a btrfs disk, and now it's sticky!
      • I hear the standard block size of btrfs is 8 oz.
      • How can I make a business case for btrfs? I'm all for introducing new tech, but my boss only cares about how it will affect our margarins.
      • Will btrfs keep my servers from grinding? I'm a bit worried that if they churn too much, my files will separate!
      • And most importantly, In an emergency, can I use btrfs for a smoother fsck?
  3. Whoa! by aevans · · Score: 5, Funny

    A Linux article on Slashdot!?

  4. Re:BTRFS? REALLY? by hampton · · Score: 5, Funny

    You're right. BTRFS is really silly. I recommend that the shortened form be ButtFS.

  5. Re:BTRFS? REALLY? by spazdor · · Score: 5, Funny

    Good, strong file-bearing hips!

    --
    DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!
  6. Re:Why not ZFS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Huh. One of the interesting things things about Reiser4 from an end-user perspective was Hans Reisers plans for file metadata.

    No, the most interesting feature of ReiserFS is this one (look to the far right).

    --
    ReiserFS: It puts the "stab" in "/etc/fstab".

  7. Re:Why not ZFS? by deniable · · Score: 5, Funny

    Yep, BeaTeR FS is a kinder, gentler alternative to Reiser FS.

  8. Re:BTRFS? REALLY? by Ragzouken · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is the internet, it's never too soon.

  9. buttfsck!! by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 5, Funny

    You think that's bad? The file system check command is buttfsck!