[hapless]

OpenBSD's pre-journaling FFS is ancient and creaky but also extremely robust

I am not sure there is a more robust, or simple, filesystem in use today. Most networking devices, including, yes, your UPS, use something like FFS to handle writeable media.

I am not accustomed to defending OpenBSD in any context. It is, in every way, a museum, an exhibition of clever works and past curiosities for the modern visitor.

But this is a deeply weird hill to die on. The "Fast File System," fifty years old and audited to no end, is your greatest fear? It ain't fast, and it's barely a "file system," but its robustness? indubitable. It is very reliably boring and slow. It is the cutting edge circa 2BSD

edit: I am mistaken, the FFS actually dates to 4.1BSD. It is only 44 years old, not 50. Pardon me for my error.

[yyyk]

OpenBSD FFS is robust in the sense of 'it is unlikely an FFS bug will lose your data'. But it is ancient, and, well, there are reasons for filesystem developments in the last half century, like 'not losing your data thanks to blackouts or hw bug'.

The lack of at least a journaling FS is inexcusable in a modern OS. Linux and Windows have had it for 25 years by now, and we could argue softupdates are roughly equivalent (FreeBSD has had SU+J for years now too).