*corrupts your data*Why is Red Hat so bad at building file systems?
XFS was created by SGI for their IRIX system
>>109602333>acthaually, those people from 30 years ago are responsible for the filesystem i develop for decades being bad
>>109602353you specifically said "building", not "maintaining"you were simply wrong, deal with it
>>109602361it's the same people who accuse redhat for anything about wayland when it was made by engineers from Intel.
>>109602368The original creator worked at both intel and Red Hat
>>109602361xfs didn't progress in 30 years and only barely got maintained?
>>109602409and this makes saying Red Hat built XFS less wrong, how?
>>109602412they aren't building it?
>>109602417yes, they are building it, but the one who laid the first brick 30 years ago wasn't a Red Hat employee yet, therefor Red Hat is not responsible for anything wrong in anything they built since then
>>109602326imagine a filesystem so bad that your very own product of your own company refuses to use it
Remember when Linus Tech Tips was surprised that there was a known data corruption bug in XFS for three years, and none of the XFS Red Hat developers gave a flying fuck?They even know what exact commit was introducing it, and simply didn't revert, because fuck you.
Reliability goes like this:ext 4 > xfs > f2fs > btrfsJust use ext4 if you're not doing some kind of business shit with huge databases
it's still not as bad as NTFS
>>109602672no idea what makes you believe that an fs that does checksumming would be less reliable than the one known for data corruption
>>109602480That's kernel Linus, not YouTube Linus
Only idiots use this Red Hat corpo garbage.
>>109602375at the same time?
>>109602672>butterfs at the bottom of the listishygddt
