<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Trying Linux again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/</link>
	<description>Radioactive Toy</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:11:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Heliologue</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423796</link>
		<dc:creator>Heliologue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 15:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423796</guid>
		<description>Maybe, but FAT32 performance is abysmal on large drives.  And once again, FAT32 has no journaling or advanced features at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe, but FAT32 performance is abysmal on large drives.  And once again, FAT32 has no journaling or advanced features at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423783</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2006 01:52:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423783</guid>
		<description>I don't really want to leave it as NTFS since I've already had issues. I've made folders in Ubuntu that Windows saw as corrupted (which is probably the root of my current problem). Maybe FAT32. I don't have any files over 2 GB, so I'm well under the max file size.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t really want to leave it as NTFS since I&#8217;ve already had issues. I&#8217;ve made folders in Ubuntu that Windows saw as corrupted (which is probably the root of my current problem). Maybe FAT32. I don&#8217;t have any files over 2 GB, so I&#8217;m well under the max file size.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Heliologue</title>
		<link>http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423765</link>
		<dc:creator>Heliologue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2006 17:29:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.speedkill.org/2006/12/18/1666/#comment-423765</guid>
		<description>Ubuntu Edgy's quality is way under par.  I've had nothing but problems while I've tried it.  Hopefully Feisty will have a better standard, though part of me doubts it.

Also, I'd be very careful about &lt;strong&gt;(a)&lt;/strong&gt; ext2 partitions for important data and &lt;strong&gt;(b)&lt;/strong&gt; using ext2 drivers in Windows.  Remember that ext2 doesn't do journaling, which every modern filesystem (like ext3) does.  The only thing I would ever suggest using ext2 for is &lt;code&gt;/boot&lt;/code&gt;.  I've also had some filename issues when accessing ext2/3 partitions from Windows&#8212;the driver's Unicode implementation is sketchy, I think.  You might just be better off leaving it formatted as NTFS and using the new ntfs-3g drivers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ubuntu Edgy&#8217;s quality is way under par.  I&#8217;ve had nothing but problems while I&#8217;ve tried it.  Hopefully Feisty will have a better standard, though part of me doubts it.</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;d be very careful about <strong>(a)</strong> ext2 partitions for important data and <strong>(b)</strong> using ext2 drivers in Windows.  Remember that ext2 doesn&#8217;t do journaling, which every modern filesystem (like ext3) does.  The only thing I would ever suggest using ext2 for is <code>/boot</code>.  I&#8217;ve also had some filename issues when accessing ext2/3 partitions from Windows&mdash;the driver&#8217;s Unicode implementation is sketchy, I think.  You might just be better off leaving it formatted as NTFS and using the new ntfs-3g drivers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
