# reiser4 expected stable next week

## ewan.paton

http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/2761?PHPSESSID=9240b20ef3b57da8e4d5afd6b488f302#comment

i know we have been here before but hey this time it looks like its going to be final,and they are asking for volinteers to help the testing, thats what us gentooers do best.

out of interest are old partitions created from snapshots going to be accessable/as stable when using the new final code or will they need remade

----------

## gringo

oh, great news ! have been counting the days!

----------

## mirko_3

finally.... :Very Happy: 

----------

## Proton

Hehe, excellent news. I think I'll setup a small drive for tests soon  :Smile: 

----------

## ronmon

Hmm, with a new (to me) iBook on the way maybe I'll give it a shot. Been using reiserfs for years and love it.

----------

## Moriah

Superb!  I am converting 9 machines from rh9 to gentoo 2.6 and I want reiser4 to go in from the start.

I also want lvm2 *WITH SNAPSHOTS* at the same time.  Is there any hope for this?

My total wish list is 2.6 kernel, reiser4, and lvm2 with working snapshot feature.

----------

## Spawn of Lovechild

cool, make me a livecd and I'll risk my HD for testing.

----------

## Genone

I hope they reconsider it, from what I heard from several people it's nowhere near production quality.

----------

## Chineseyes

 *Genone wrote:*   

> I hope they reconsider it, from what I heard from several people it's nowhere near production quality.

 

I'm gonna have to agree on that one, as a reiserfs user I naturally was tempted to try reiser4 and have been applying the latest patches to try it out for the last couple of months now.  Not only is reiser4 nowhere near production quality, I would venture to say that its just not stable. Stable being that you can be reasonable certain that your not going to loose all your data at some random time for some random unknown reason.  As you can see I've set the standard pretty low.   This labeling of reiserfs stable much too early is exactly what turned people off to it and this lead a lot of people burnt by data loss to spread horror stories about reiserfs that no longer hold true, I am certain this will be the case with reiser4.  My point is labeling something as critical as a filesystem 'stable' should be taken a lot more seriously and I question if this was the case with reiserfs and is now the case reiser4.

----------

## zerojay

 *Chineseyes wrote:*   

>  *Genone wrote:*   I hope they reconsider it, from what I heard from several people it's nowhere near production quality. 
> 
> I'm gonna have to agree on that one, as a reiserfs user I naturally was tempted to try reiser4 and have been applying the latest patches to try it out for the last couple of months now.  Not only is reiser4 nowhere near production quality, I would venture to say that its just not stable. Stable being that you can be reasonable certain that your not going to loose all your data at some random time for some random unknown reason.  As you can see I've set the standard pretty low.   This labeling of reiserfs stable much too early is exactly what turned people off to it and this lead a lot of people burnt by data loss to spread horror stories about reiserfs that no longer hold true, I am certain this will be the case with reiser4.  My point is labeling something as critical as a filesystem 'stable' should be taken a lot more seriously and I question if this was the case with reiserfs and is now the case reiser4.

 

How about telling us what happened before you blame all your problems on reiser?

----------

