>hdd steal 10% of your disk space with "tib" and "gib" meme units
>ext4 steals another 5% of your disk space for "reserves"
NTFS is better than this crap.
Hdd steal 10% of your disk space with "tib" and "gib" meme units
Ayden Perry
Nathaniel Rodriguez
bad bait, however, since I know retards will respond to this this is now a bcachefs thread.
Charles Johnson
that's the default behavior for this garbage filesystem, why?
Carson Morris
Don't care or know what you're talking about because any sane person is using bcachefs or xfs on desktop (or zfs in non desktop environments where stability is required)
Maybe if you used a filesystem with COW, zstd compression, and deduplication you wouldn't have this problem.
Isaac Martin
I use gnu/linux
Jayden Moore
If your post is just overflowing with bait, it's too obvious. Delete the thread and try again.
Andrew Green
>NTFS is better than this crap.
Yes because giving the disk permission to everything for everybody better.
Jace Rivera
it's so if you run out of space, important services can keep working, giving you a chance to fix things without the system falling flat
the reserved space permits only root to write to it, so you can think of it instead as a soft 95%-limit on non-root software
you can change or remove it, but there should be no reason to, in general you don't want to completely fill any filesystem, since as you approach 100%, fragmentation inevitably shoots up
Brandon Lee
>>hdd steal 10% of your disk space with "tib" and "gib" meme units
Are you beyond retarded?
Parker Baker
Permissions on single user environment is a meme and you know this. Windows is for single user
Logan Thompson
Then why does it use multiple users for running processes?
Matthew Morgan
internal use, protect the user from themselves
consumer editions of windows don't let you run two consoles/sessions at the same time
Benjamin Russell
I don't understand why it's called ext4. It's ext1.7 at absolute best.
If NTFS was versioned like ext is, it'd have a number comparable with Firefox - and is completely backward compatible: you can mount an NTFS from NT 3.1 and use it immediately and without problems.
Anthony Roberts
That's an artefact of your shitty reverse-engineered driver and shittier 50 year-old hobby OS, which can't understand anything remotely as advanced as NT ACLs.
Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. It's not about "protecting the user", it's a licensing thing, nothing more, as proven by RDPWrap.
Easton Baker
OPs post made me look into it a bit further and I found these two links that solve my problems quite nicely:
>Change permissions
askubuntu.com
>Change ownership
askubuntu.com
Basically, instead of using commands to change permissions and ownership you have to change some stuff in fstab.
Umask for dealing with permissions and uid for dealing with ownership.
Kevin Anderson
forgot pic
Christopher Cooper
So it isn't a single user environment by your own admission, then.
Dylan Wilson
I fucked up the links, too. I need sleep.
>Change permissions
askubuntu.com
>Change ownership
askubuntu.com
Zachary Hernandez
>downsides of single user combined with downsides of multi user
fucking microsoft
Dylan Smith
>Snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. It's not about "protecting the user", it's a licensing thing, nothing more, as proven by RDPWrap.
you misunderstood me
not having multiple sessions isn't to protect the user, the internal use of multiple users is for user protection, things like "system" and "trusted user" are tools to prevent the user fucking things up (among other things)
Elijah Bailey
never assume you're talking to the same person twice