On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 12:55:28 +0200
"Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" <office(a)klepp.biz> wrote:
Am Dienstag, 21. August 2018 schrieb Nick
Koretsky:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2018 09:20:43 +0200
>
> "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" <office(a)klepp.biz> wrote:
> > > Its tears so far Nik. There are so many differences just in
> > > the ext4's used that one of them should be renamed, they
> > > will NOT cross mount, ext4 disk to ext4 mount.
> >
> > Hi Gene!
> >
> > When you cannot mount the ext4 partions from one another,
> > then there is something very wrong. ext4 can be mounted as
> > ext2 and that should alway work - at least, if the drives and
> > filesystems are ok.
>
> No, you are wrong. There were options added to ext4 which made
> it incompatible with older kernels. And a few years ago they
> made this options default. Debian wheezy kernel (3.2) would not
> mount ext4 created in debian stretch.
Hi!
Now that's a gotcha I did not know. How did it come that this was
thought of beeing a good idea?
Nik
Yep. Exactly my thought when i spent 3-hours with a server refusing
to boot after migration to a new hdd (i used a stretch flash to
copy). Who the fuck toughs it was a good idea?!! Why not call it
ext5 or ext4a or whatever?!!