Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 01:59:41 -0100 From: ".VWV." <victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ufs and ext Message-ID: <200304260159.41548.victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> In-Reply-To: <eeadee9jjp.dee@localhost.localdomain> References: <200304250203.28738.victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> <200304252345.55600.victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> <eeadee9jjp.dee@localhost.localdomain>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 25 April 2003 23:41, you wrote: > ".VWV." <victorvittorivonwiktow@interfree.it> writes: > > > > I have noticed both BSD and Linux pre-compiled kernels cannot mou= nt > > > > read-write the other filesystem. It's a shame that a newbie could > > > > think one is able to read, the other one is able to write. We kno= w > > > > ufs was born before ext. Some Linux distributions has also adopte= d > > > > ReiserFS on Linux, that's really a not-unix filesystem. Why at PA= SC > > > > nobody has declared what's the best standard? > > There is one pretty-good almost-filesystem standard which I've used > successfully, namely "tar". You can write and read a tarball on an > otherwise-unused partition (ie, raw device, no real filesystem) from > multiple types of OSes. Since the tapes' era, 'tar' is really the only common resource. =2EVWV.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200304260159.41548.victorvittorivonwiktow>