From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 3 14:25:06 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B1844D4 for ; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 14:25:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org) Received: from duck.symmetricom.us (duck.symmetricom.us [206.168.13.214]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 128D68FC12 for ; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 14:24:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from damnhippie.dyndns.org (daffy.symmetricom.us [206.168.13.218]) by duck.symmetricom.us (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qA3EOeiT030232 for ; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 08:24:40 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org) Received: from [172.22.42.240] (revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240]) by damnhippie.dyndns.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qA3EOa7W009937; Sat, 3 Nov 2012 08:24:37 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org) Subject: Re: [patch] Re: SU+J on 9.1-RC2 ISO From: Ian Lepore To: Mark Felder In-Reply-To: <20121103090830.0000009d@unknown> References: <5093F934.7050306@ose.nl> <5093FD3D.3080201@ateamsystems.com> <1351876381.2657.1.camel@mjakubik.localdomain> <50940276.5030306@ateamsystems.com> <50940C20.3090409@ose.nl> <50940E40.3090709@ose.nl> <5094112C.2070102@ose.nl> <20121102184131.GB22755@dft-labs.eu> <5094184B.6070100@ose.nl> <20121103090830.0000009d@unknown> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 08:24:36 -0600 Message-ID: <1351952676.1120.33.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Bas Smeelen , Mateusz Guzik , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:25:06 -0000 On Sat, 2012-11-03 at 09:08 -0500, Mark Felder wrote: > On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 20:00:27 +0100 > Bas Smeelen wrote: > > > Though the last 10 years I have not had the inconvenience of having to > > deal with long fsck' s or bgfsck' s on servers or workstation installs, > > so I think this should not be default on new installs. > > This is one man's opinion. On the other hand, SUJ by default is a godsend for me because of the number of crashes/fscks I've been dealing with. So SUJ has been a godsend for you. I don't see anything in your statement that supports it being the default. Given how much trouble it has been for people in the past, I don't plan to embrace journaling any faster than I embraced softupdates originally. That is to say, it will be years before I use it. I suspect my attitude on this isn't all that uncommon, and is likely the explanation for why things increasingly become the default before their time these days. Developers are motivated to push new features into wide use quickly, because that gets the new features lots of testing. Prudent users aren't interested in being guinea pigs, and will push back. -- Ian