EXT3 for root filesystem

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Fri Dec 9 07:11:04 PST 2005

Steve Prior wrote:

> The LFS book uses EXT2 so I guess I can't claim legit breakage,
> but a couple of questions:
> 1. Is there some reason it is a bad idea to use EXT3 for the root
>     filesystem?
> 2. Assuming #1 is no, is it common practice to use EXT3 for root?
> 3. Can we make things a little bit easier by providing a default
>    "generic" kernel config which makes a good starting point by
>    compiling EXT3 and other popular filesystems used for root?  That
>    would save a lot of time doing things like re-entering chroot
>    and rebuilding.  I'm sure the concept of "generic" is where I'm
>    running into trouble with this...

You're not the first person that said they use the CD's .config as a
starting point. Personally, I can't figure out why someone would do
that. The .config has a *lot* of stuff included on it; the kernel has
been patched three times to support reiser4, squashfs and unionfs; the
default .config builds all SCSI drivers it can directly into the kernel
and modularizes nearly everything else. In short, it's a pretty odd
starting place.

IMHO, you'd get a much more "generic" and correct starting point if you
just ran 'make defconfig' inside the unpacked linux source. Try that, if
you don't mind, and let me know please just how well the resultant
.config file fits your PC.


More information about the livecd mailing list