ext2 is a *lot* smaller than ext4. Then again, if you need to build an extremely... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		JoshTriplett on July 23, 2015 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: rm -r fs/ext3 ext2 is a lot smaller than ext4. Then again, if you need to build an extremely tiny system, you probably want something even tinier than ext2.

makomk on July 23, 2015 [–]

Yeah, I think it's still in use on embedded systems that need read-write filesystems. (Read-only filesystems often end up being squashfs instead for space reasons.)

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact