Perhaps then, if someone with the skill to work on the Linux side of the stuff can figure out how to solve some of the issues, the patches could be sent into the upstream for affected components, and I do have some knowledge of NSIS, but Wubi code is somewhat difficult for me to sift through.... So how does the latest version of the installer work exactly? I am somewhat confused now.... <div>On 9/13/07, Ago <<a href="mailto:agostino.russo@gmail.com">agostino.russo@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Douglas McClendon <dmc.fedora <at> <a href="http://filteredperception.org">filteredperception.org</a>> writes: > This is I think what I've been noticing as well in a similar situation. > The one time I tried to recover, fsck _completely_ horked the ext3 fs. I am no fs expert, but my understanding is: nested filesystem => forget about the journal in the nested fs I may be wrong, but I'd guess that VMs suffer the same problem, and the hosted fs journal can also get corrupted in case of a hard reboot of the hosting system. In short I would expect Wubi I/O behavior/performance to be on par or better than a VM, under all scenarios. BUT in a VM under windows you would use windows fs driver for the hosting system, while we use ntfs-3g/vfat. So the above statement assumes that ntfs-3g/vfat behaviour/perfomance is equivalent to the windows counterpart. > This was also my first thought. The down side, is that in my usage > scenario, the fs would be typically on a usb-flash-stick, and it seems > like an undesirable thing to be writing to it as often as possible, > rather than periodically. You can always tweak the scripts affecting sysctl > Question- are these sysctl settings controlling the writes from the > hosted-fs-™host-fs, or from the host-fs-™disk, or both? Should be both since that affects the kernel. > This sounds like it could be fixed with smarter ordering. Do you > foresee that, or is it for some reason a more-or-less unfixable problem? Yes Ubuntu kernel hackers have been looking into this, there was just no time to do it for the 7.10 release, it will probably be fixed for the next release. But that is beyond my skills. Regards, Ago -- fedora-devel-list mailing list <a href="mailto:fedora-devel-list@redhat.com">fedora-devel-list@redhat.com</a> <a href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list </a> </blockquote></div>