Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #291376 > unrolled thread

Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy

Contents

  Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? taka0038@gmail.com - 2015-04-24 06:40 -0700
    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-24 15:50 +0200
      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2015-04-24 11:37 -0600
    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-24 10:15 -0400
    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-24 20:33 +0000
      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-24 17:44 -0400
        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-24 23:58 +0200
        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? owl <owl@rooftop.invalid> - 2015-04-24 22:00 +0000
          Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-24 18:26 -0400
            Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-25 00:36 +0200
              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-24 15:54 -0700
                Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-24 21:01 -0400
                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-24 18:52 -0700
                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-25 10:28 +0200
                    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 10:09 -0700
                      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-04-25 20:16 +0200
                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 11:21 -0700
                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-04-25 20:50 +0200
                          Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-25 16:36 -0400
                            Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-27 08:07 -0500
                      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-25 14:36 -0400
                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 15:11 -0700
                          Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 18:18 -0400
                            Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 15:30 -0700
                              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 18:44 -0400
                            Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-25 20:55 -0400
                              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 21:38 -0400
                                Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 18:47 -0700
                                Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-25 21:58 -0400
                                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 22:10 -0400
                                    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-25 22:31 -0400
                                      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 22:34 -0400
                                      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 19:36 -0700
                                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 22:38 -0400
                                          Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 19:56 -0700
                                            Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-25 23:15 -0400
                                              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 20:27 -0700
                                                Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-26 09:13 -0400
                                                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-26 12:40 -0400
                                                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-26 10:33 -0700
                              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-25 19:38 -0700
                          Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-25 20:52 -0400
              Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-27 09:55 -0500
                Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-04-27 11:17 -0400
                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-27 13:56 -0400
                    Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-27 11:11 -0700
                      Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> - 2015-04-27 17:17 -0400
                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Tomas <tgif9fri@numo.net> - 2015-04-27 18:07 -0400
                        Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-04-27 16:52 -0700
                  Re: Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps? chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-28 09:41 -0500
    What a putz that Taka be, or should I say Penis? John Gohde <john.h.gohde@gmail.com> - 2015-04-25 03:22 -0700
      Re: What a putz that Taka be, or should I say Penis? taka0038@gmail.com - 2015-04-25 09:17 -0700

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

#291376 — Any CoW technology like btrfs or zfs from the M$ or iExpensive Camps?

NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!

On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.

Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#291379

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 06:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
taka0038@gmail.com wrote:

> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern
> world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
> 
> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes
> and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes
> to HDD what boosts performance.
> 
> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and
> ext4/btrfs for reliability. 

Don't forget ZFS it is rock stable!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291445

Melzzzzz wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 06:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern
>> world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>> 
>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes
>> and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes
>> to HDD what boosts performance.
>> 
>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and
>> ext4/btrfs for reliability.
> 
> Don't forget ZFS it is rock stable!

Just as long as you have ECC ram.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291384

On 2015-04-24 9:40 AM, taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>
> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.
>
> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...

Nobody is denying that NTFS and HFS+ are outdated. In fact, we all 
called for them to be replaced in threads from a few months ago. I know 
that Microsoft is already interested in developing a new one (since we 
know that they were working on WinFS at one point) and that Apple is 
also aware of HFS+'s drawbacks. The issue is that they're still better 
than the competition (as DFS demonstrated) and a replacement isn't the 
highest priority.

-- 
Slimer
Encrypt.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291474

taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!

> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.

> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...

... and fat12 and fat16 :)

(And of course Linux got all those too).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291489

On 2015-04-24 4:33 PM, owl wrote:
> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>
>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.
>
>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...
>
> ... and fat12 and fat16 :)
>
> (And of course Linux got all those too).

Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have 
shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.

-- 
Slimer
Encrypt.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291498

Slimer wrote:

> On 2015-04-24 4:33 PM, owl wrote:
>> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
>>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern
>>> world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>>
>>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and
>>> you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD
>>> what boosts performance.
>>
>>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and
>>> ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...
>>
>> ... and fat12 and fat16 :)
>>
>> (And of course Linux got all those too).
> 
> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
> 

It is still developed. And what have the other developers to do with The 
deeds of Hans Reiser? Your brother also has nothing to do with your 
paedophile obsessions, so he should not be clobbered each day

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291499

Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote:
> On 2015-04-24 4:33 PM, owl wrote:
>> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
>>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>>
>>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.
>>
>>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...
>>
>> ... and fat12 and fat16 :)
>>
>> (And of course Linux got all those too).

> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have 
> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.

I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
now on moral grounds. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291509

On 2015-04-24 6:00 PM, owl wrote:
> Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote:
>> On 2015-04-24 4:33 PM, owl wrote:
>>> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>>>
>>>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to HDD what boosts performance.
>>>
>>>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...
>>>
>>> ... and fat12 and fat16 :)
>>>
>>> (And of course Linux got all those too).
>
>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
>> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>
> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
> now on moral grounds.

Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At 
the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it 
might just have been reiserfs itself.


-- 
Slimer
Encrypt.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291514

Slimer wrote:

> On 2015-04-24 6:00 PM, owl wrote:
>> Slimer <slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote:
>>> On 2015-04-24 4:33 PM, owl wrote:
>>>> taka0038@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> NTFS as well as HFS are outdated, journalling is not enough in modern
>>>>> world...  And of course we need the snapshots!
>>>>
>>>>> On the other hand if your machine is rock stable and never freezes and
>>>>> you got a reliable UPS, you can decrease the frequency of flushes to
>>>>> HDD what boosts performance.
>>>>
>>>>> Linux got reiserfs for many small files, xfs for big files and
>>>>> ext4/btrfs for reliability. M$ got fat32 and ntfs only ...
>>>>
>>>> ... and fat12 and fat16 :)
>>>>
>>>> (And of course Linux got all those too).
>>
>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
>>> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>
>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>> now on moral grounds.
> 
> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
> might just have been reiserfs itself.
> 

Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around 
2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to 
run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"

And now you will claim that you are not Snit Michael Glasser, the lying 
imbecile Prescott Computer Guy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291516

On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
>>>> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>> 
>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>> now on moral grounds.
>> 
>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
>> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
>> might just have been reiserfs itself.
>> 
> 
> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
> run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
> 
> And now you will claim that you are not Snit Michael Glasser, the lying
> imbecile Prescott Computer Guy

Some deny there is an obsession with me in COLA. Here is Peter Köhlmann
proving his obsession.

Weird.


-- 
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mavericks / Pages 5.1:            <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291522

On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>
>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
>>>>> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>>> now on moral grounds.
>>>
>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
>>> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
>>> might just have been reiserfs itself.
>>>
>>
>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
>> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
>> run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
>>
>> And now you will claim that you are not Snit Michael Glasser, the lying
>> imbecile Prescott Computer Guy
>
> Some deny there is an obsession with me in COLA. Here is Peter Köhlmann
> proving his obsession.
>
> Weird.

This is additional proof that Peter Köhlmann can't read. Let's re-read 
my statement:

"Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it (reiserfs) 
exclusively."

and Peter's response:

"You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around 2003/2004". 
After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"

Never once did I state that I used _Linux_ exclusively in that post. He 
just made that up from thin air. And then he claims that _you_ are the 
one manipulating quotes, having trouble reading and making shit up. Even 
if he claims that my sentence structure was unclear, the quoted text is 
referring to reiserfs. Anyone with half a brain would have figured it out.

What a retarded little shit the guy is.

-- 
Slimer
Encrypt.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291524

On 4/24/15, 6:01 PM, in article mheoup$62b$1@dont-email.me, "Slimer"
<slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote:

> On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
>> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
>> <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would have
>>>>>> shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>>>> now on moral grounds.
>>>> 
>>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
>>>> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
>>>> might just have been reiserfs itself.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
>>> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
>>> run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
>>> 
>>> And now you will claim that you are not Snit Michael Glasser, the lying
>>> imbecile Prescott Computer Guy
>> 
>> Some deny there is an obsession with me in COLA. Here is Peter Köhlmann
>> proving his obsession.
>> 
>> Weird.
> 
> This is additional proof that Peter Köhlmann can't read. Let's re-read
> my statement:
> 
> "Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it (reiserfs)
> exclusively."
> 
> and Peter's response:
> 
> "You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around 2003/2004".
> After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
> run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
> 
> Never once did I state that I used _Linux_ exclusively in that post. He
> just made that up from thin air. And then he claims that _you_ are the
> one manipulating quotes, having trouble reading and making shit up. Even
> if he claims that my sentence structure was unclear, the quoted text is
> referring to reiserfs. Anyone with half a brain would have figured it out.

And I did... which proves I have half a brain!

Wait.

Um. Never mind. :)

> What a retarded little shit the guy is.

He is wrong far, far more often than he is right.


-- 
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mavericks / Pages 5.1:            <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291530

Slimer wrote:

> On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
>> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would
>>>>>> have shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>>>> now on moral grounds.
>>>>
>>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
>>>> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
>>>> might just have been reiserfs itself.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
>>> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need
>>> to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
>>>
>>> And now you will claim that you are not Snit Michael Glasser, the lying
>>> imbecile Prescott Computer Guy
>>
>> Some deny there is an obsession with me in COLA. Here is Peter Köhlmann
>> proving his obsession.
>>
>> Weird.
> 
> This is additional proof that Peter Köhlmann can't read. Let's re-read
> my statement:
> 
> "Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it (reiserfs)
> exclusively."
> 
> and Peter's response:
> 
> "You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around 2003/2004".
> After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need to
> run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
> 
> Never once did I state that I used _Linux_ exclusively in that post. He
> just made that up from thin air. And then he claims that _you_ are the
> one manipulating quotes, having trouble reading and making shit up. Even
> if he claims that my sentence structure was unclear, the quoted text is
> referring to reiserfs. Anyone with half a brain would have figured it out.
> 
> What a retarded little shit the guy is.
> 

Quote

"Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively"

Idiot

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291555

On 4/25/15, 1:28 AM, in article mhfj66$3ee$1@dont-email.me, "Peter Köhlmann"
<peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> Slimer wrote:
> 
>> On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
>>> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would
>>>>>>> have shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his family.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>>>>> now on moral grounds.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively. At
>>>>> the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
>>>>> might just have been reiserfs itself.
>>>> 
>>>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
>>>> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the need
>>>> to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"

...
 
> Quote
> 
> "Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively"
> 
> Idiot

And now the quote with context!

  Slimer:
    -----
    || Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they
    || would have shunned that filesystem after what the author did to
    || his family.
    || 
    | I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use
    | it now on moral grounds.
    | 
    Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it
    exclusively. At the time, I remember thinking that Linux was
    incredibly unstable but it might just have been reiserfs itself.
    -----

It is completely clear Slimer was in in reference to the idea that when he
used Linux in 2003/2004, he exclusively used reiserfs. But Peter Köhlmann
responded with:

  Peter Köhlmann:
    -----
    Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively
    around 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you
    felt the need to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
    -----

Listen, Peter, we *all* make mistakes. You made one here. The honest and
honorable thing to do would be to simply say, "whoops, I misread that and
thought you meant you used Linux exclusively."

But it is 100% predictable you will *not* do this. You will never do this.

Then you ask Slimer and I for a favor to help you understand tech concepts.

Wow. The nerve.

-- 
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mavericks / Pages 5.1:            <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291559

The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser snotted:

> On 4/25/15, 1:28 AM, in article mhfj66$3ee$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> 
>> Slimer wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
>>>> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
>>>> Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they would
>>>>>>>> have shunned that filesystem after what the author did to his
>>>>>>>> family.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use it
>>>>>>> now on moral grounds.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively.
>>>>>> At the time, I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable
>>>>>> but it might just have been reiserfs itself.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively around
>>>>> 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you felt the
>>>>> need to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
> 
> ...
>  
>> Quote
>> 
>> "Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it exclusively"
>> 
>> Idiot
> 
> And now the quote with context!
> 

Idiot. Snit Slimeball claimed that he used ReiserFS exclusivly. And he 
claimed:

"I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it 
might just have been reiserfs itself."

It is quite irrelevant if linux was itself "very unstable" or if it was just 
ReiserFS. Because in both cases it would have resulted in a very unstable 
system.

So that Piece of a Snit claimed that he used a "very unstable system". 
Exactly what I wrote. No amount of weasel wording from you will change that 
fact

Apart from the fact that it is (again) a snittish lie. Linux was years 
before that much more stable than windows has ever achieved

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291560

On 4/25/15, 11:16 AM, in article mhgljt$33f$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

...
>> And now the quote with context!
>> 
> 
> Idiot. Snit Slimeball claimed that he used ReiserFS exclusivly. And he
> claimed:
> 
> "I remember thinking that Linux was incredibly unstable but it
> might just have been reiserfs itself."
> 
> It is quite irrelevant if linux was itself "very unstable" or if it was just
> ReiserFS. Because in both cases it would have resulted in a very unstable
> system.
> 
> So that Piece of a Snit claimed that he used a "very unstable system".
> Exactly what I wrote. No amount of weasel wording from you will change that
> fact
> 
> Apart from the fact that it is (again) a snittish lie. Linux was years
> before that much more stable than windows has ever achieved

My comments:

---------------------------------------------------------------
  Slimer:
    -----
    || Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they
    || would have shunned that filesystem after what the author did to
    || his family.
    || 
    | I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't use
    | it now on moral grounds.
    | 
    Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it
    exclusively. At the time, I remember thinking that Linux was
    incredibly unstable but it might just have been reiserfs itself.
    -----

It is completely clear Slimer was in in reference to the idea that when he
used Linux in 2003/2004, he exclusively used reiserfs. But Peter Köhlmann
responded with:

  Peter Köhlmann:
    -----
    Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively
    around 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable" you
    felt the need to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
    -----

Listen, Peter, we *all* make mistakes. You made one here. The honest and
honorable thing to do would be to simply say, "whoops, I misread that and
thought you meant you used Linux exclusively."

But it is 100% predictable you will *not* do this. You will never do this.
---------------------------------------------------------------
 
My prediction is being proved correct.

Now my next prediction: neither DFS nor Steve Carroll nor any of the
"advocates" will call Peter out on this. They pretend to care about honesty
but they do not. They will NEVER call Peter out on this lie of his.

Just to prove me wrong Carroll *might* make a brief comment... so I will say
this is only 98% predictable. :)


Those who troll COLA are very easy to predict in their dishonesty.


-- 
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu:     <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs?     <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Mint KDE working with folders:    <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files:          <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help:                    <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation:      <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mavericks / Pages 5.1:            <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison:   <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291565

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 20:16:25 +0200
Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

> The lying imbecile Snit Michael Glasser snotted:
> 
> > On 4/25/15, 1:28 AM, in article mhfj66$3ee$1@dont-email.me, "Peter
> > Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> > 
> >> Slimer wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On 2015-04-24 6:54 PM, Snit wrote:
> >>>> On 4/24/15, 3:36 PM, in article mhegg4$d2s$1@dont-email.me,
> >>>> "Peter Köhlmann" <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Is reiserfs still being actively developed? You'd think they
> >>>>>>>> would have shunned that filesystem after what the author did
> >>>>>>>> to his family.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> I don't know.  I used it for a while years ago.  I wouldn't
> >>>>>>> use it now on moral grounds.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it
> >>>>>> exclusively. At the time, I remember thinking that Linux was
> >>>>>> incredibly unstable but it might just have been reiserfs
> >>>>>> itself.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Certainly. You used an "incredibly unstable" OS "exclusively
> >>>>> around 2003/2004". After all, it ran so "incredibly unstable"
> >>>>> you felt the need to run it "exclusively around 2003/2004"
> > 
> > ...
> >  
> >> Quote
> >> 
> >> "Whenever I installed Linux around 2003/2004, I used it
> >> exclusively"
> >> 
> >> Idiot
> > 
> > And now the quote with context!
> > 
> 
> Idiot. Snit Slimeball claimed that he used ReiserFS exclusivly.

Slimeball is liar troll.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291569

Melzzzzz wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 20:16:25 +0200
> Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:
>> 
>> Idiot. Snit Slimeball claimed that he used ReiserFS exclusivly.
>
> Slimeball is liar troll.

And a thick, nasty, libellious douchebag.

-- 
Trifles make perfection, and perfection is no trifle.
		-- Michelangelo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#291775

Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Melzzzzz wrote:
>>
>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>>> 
>>> Idiot. Snit Slimeball claimed that he used ReiserFS exclusivly.
>>
>> Slimeball is liar troll.
>
>And a thick, nasty, libellious douchebag.

"GreyCloud" likes him, though.

-- 
"Yeah, but who is going to sue Apple if they don't publicly release
the code for CUPS?  No one.  None of these tightwads will go to bat
and pay money for a good lawyer to go up against a large team of
corporate lawyers." -  some POS that calls itself "GreyCloud"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 3  [1] 2 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy

csiph-web