SaltyIceteaMaker ,

So i normally go with ext4, however windows can't really access ext4 drives so you'd need to find a file system that both support if you want to access the drive/partition from windows. My drive with all the games is ntfs for example which works in Windows and Linux. (At least for normal storage, idk if you can boot linux from it although i wouldn't see why not)

bjoern_tantau ,
@bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de avatar

NTFS can't handle Linux file permissions. It is not suited as a system drive.

And supposedly it can give you problems if you use it to store your Steam games. I never cared to test that, though.

thingsiplay ,
@thingsiplay@beehaw.org avatar

I was always wondering if there could be a small Linux partition for additional information of NTFS partitions, like meta data stored as a separate file (or database). And off course it would need some virtualization layer like WINE does for the file path mapping. Then it would be possible to use NTFS as system drive and for games.

Obviously this would be problematic and performance wouldn't be great either (assuming), and it would complicate things for end user and developers too. But I was always thinking if this would be possible.

skullgiver ,
@skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl avatar

NTFS can handle Linux permissions perfectly. In fact, many Linux filesystems lack the kind of permissions that NTFS does support, not the other way around. FAT doesn't do permissions, but NTFS has supported decent ("extended" for Linux filesystems) permissions since the mid 90s, i believe even since before Linux even existed.

The NTFS driver on Linux isn't very good or fast, so I'd avoid NTFS for a system drive for sure, but as a filesystem, NTFS is fine. It also doesn't help that many distros don't ship the modern NTFS driver in the kernel, so booting off NTFS doesn't work in many cases.

SaltyIceteaMaker ,

It works well enough for my game drive. At least i have yet to encounter any problem

bloodfart ,

Wsl2 lets windows do ext4

SteveTech ,

There's also an open source BTRFS driver for Windows.

bjoern_tantau ,
@bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de avatar

Just go with whatever is the default of your distribution.

That said I've come to love the automatic snapshots OpenSUSE gives me with BTRFS. I think they use snapper to automate that. It does a snapshot before and after every packet install, update or removal. And it has some system to delete snapshots that aren't needed anymore but it always keeps enough to give you peace of mind, especially when you're experimenting.

I should look into keeping some snapshots of my ~ as well. And I should implement that especially for my family.

kurcatovium ,
@kurcatovium@lemm.ee avatar

Snapper is life saver. I don't get it why nobody else use it by default, it's so great. It saved me many times. My coworker, who happens to be kind of non-linux user forced there by MS bullshit, uses Ubuntu and she's got to problems so many times, and all those would be couple clicks repair with Snapper...

KindaABigDyl ,
@KindaABigDyl@programming.dev avatar

Ext4 is, afaik, the fastest as it's the most understood

Btrfs has compression and you can make snapshots to roll back to if something goes wrong (not necessary on immutable distros or NixOS tho)

There are many other options, but I've only ever had a need for those two

refreeze ,
@refreeze@lemmy.world avatar

btrfs snapshots are still useful on immutable distros to recover accidentally deleted data.

KindaABigDyl ,
@KindaABigDyl@programming.dev avatar

True, but with files, you really benefit from the speed that ext4 provides

rotopenguin ,
@rotopenguin@infosec.pub avatar

Btrfs. Just format as one big partition (besides that little EFI partition of course) and don't worry about splitting up your disk into root and home. Put home on its own subvolume so that root can be rolled back separately from it. You can have automatic snapshots, low-overhead compression, deduplication, incremental backups. Any filesystem can fsck its own metadata, but btrfs is one of the few that also cares if your data is also intact.

Frederic ,

I used ext4 for yeeeeaaaarrssss but now I'm using LUKS+btrfs, stable, encrypted.

atzanteol ,

If you don't care any will do. ext4 is fine but check the "use LVM" button during install if you do go with ext4 since it will give you better partitioning options later.

RustyNova ,

I don't know what's the brand neW meta pick, but at least BTRFS over Ext4. BTRFS is just more stable and less corruptable than Ext4. Heck, fedora changed to it as default

8osm3rka , (edited )

To be fair, Fedora switching to something as default isn't a good sign that you should start using it. I do agree, though, btrfs has come far enough to be a default choice for most people.

swooosh ,

What did fedora adopt that wasn't a good choice in hindsight?

qaz ,

PulseAudio?

muhyb ,

I personally use ext4 everywhere but it is recommend to have BTRFS for your OS partition if you take snapshots often.

john89 ,

ext4, just keep it simple.

winterayars ,

XFS. It fills the same role as ext4 but it's less likely to lose your data and that's probably the most important part of a file system. Not that ext4 is bad or anything, but XFS is good. The only downside to XFS is you can't shrink the filesystem size.

qprimed ,

agreed. EXT4 for system, XFS for everything else (mostly large VM image files). when XFS is properly configured for the underlying drive array geometry, its a nearly perfect streamlined FS.

thingsiplay ,
@thingsiplay@beehaw.org avatar

Ext4: It's the most common used and most mature filesystem we have. You can use any rescue system without pitfalls, in case your system fails. Some other filesystems have edge cases or a special setup is required. I am not saying they are bad or so, just saying if you have to ask this question to a public forum, then it's probably more safe to just use the default Ext4 system. It's battle tested for ages.

yozul ,
@yozul@beehaw.org avatar

Honestly, unless there's some specific thing you're looking for just use your distro's default. If your distro doesn't have a default I'd probably default to ext4. The way most people use their computers there's really no noticeable advantage to any of the others, so there's no reason not to stick with old reliable. If you like to fiddle with things just to see what they can do or have unusual requirements then btrfs or zfs could be worth looking into, but if you have to ask it probably doesn't matter.

savvywolf ,
@savvywolf@pawb.social avatar

For standard use, ext4. If you want to tinker and use fancy features, btrfs (or maybe zfs?).

darklamer ,
@darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

If you don't actually have an opinion, just go with the default, ext4 really is a very good file system, but if you want to have an opinion and not go with the default, zfs is truly a fantastic file system.

Rustmilian ,
@Rustmilian@lemmy.world avatar

BTRFS &/OR EXT4

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines
    •