From 4232eb1c1f84bf879bfd82c3c6bc3eb18b4693a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joey Hess Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2022 13:08:41 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] comment --- ..._2_abb716dc8b39e1b20d8725d83a7cc662._comment | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/forum/__34__best__34___portable_filesystem_for_external_drive__63__/comment_2_abb716dc8b39e1b20d8725d83a7cc662._comment diff --git a/doc/forum/__34__best__34___portable_filesystem_for_external_drive__63__/comment_2_abb716dc8b39e1b20d8725d83a7cc662._comment b/doc/forum/__34__best__34___portable_filesystem_for_external_drive__63__/comment_2_abb716dc8b39e1b20d8725d83a7cc662._comment new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..9cddcfaea7 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/forum/__34__best__34___portable_filesystem_for_external_drive__63__/comment_2_abb716dc8b39e1b20d8725d83a7cc662._comment @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +[[!comment format=mdwn + username="joey" + subject="""comment 2""" + date="2022-09-13T16:52:30Z" + content=""" +Locking is not a concern. git-annex can lock files on a FAT +filesystem as well as on any other. (Network filesystems tend to be the +ones with problems with locking.) Lacking permissions do mean that a `rm -rf` +is more likely to delete annex objects, but a removable drive has a real +risk of accidentially being reformatted, or physically damaged, and you can +untrust it if any of those risks are too large. + +I do think that a bare repo on a removable drive can work well, +if the point of the drive is to sneakernet data back and forth, or offload +storage. Keep your local clone on the best available filesystem the OS +provides and work in there. Used in this way, FAT is no worse than S3. +"""]] -- 2.30.2