🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi there Paul "Muttley" Maskelyne, I believe it was you who said:
> barry_s@nibelung.demon.co.uk (Barry Shilliday) was gracious enough to
> state:

>>I'm tired of people flaming AFS, saying how it crashes their drives, how it
>>faster than FFS.  The fact is it *is* a lot faster, it is practically impos
>>to invalidate and is infinitely better than FFS-DC.

> I couldn't agree more.  I've been using AFS for about 6 months now,
> and I haven't had any problems with it at all.  I use it on both my
> HD's (see .sig) on which I have 4 partitions.  I used the ffs2afs
> utility to update the partitions, and that worked perfectly first
> time.  Before I changed to AFS I was having frequent disk-validation
> problems with FFS.

> Can people please stop slagging off a perfectly good file-system.

It's not the filesystem that's the problem. I use it on all my drives,
both hard , floppy and zip. It's the patchy support from FLD and the
almost total lack of useful recovery tools when something does go
wrong. It doesn't matter if the problem is caused by the filesystem or
not, if you lose data with FFS due to a crash, bad program or human
error, you have a much better chance of recovering it.

When I bought my first Amiga nine years ago, it had a disk recovery
tool with the filesystem, it wasn't that good, but it's better than
what AFS has. If they are selling it as a better replacement for the
C= filesystem, then it also needs to be at least as good as FS in this
critical area.


Neil
--

 |           Neil Bothwick, Warrington, England           |
 |--------------------------------------------------------|
               Nice computers don't go down.