> > be a highly reliable system.
>
> You do not want LFS if reliability is your main goal.  It has some
> problems that are difficult to solve, and I haven't have much time to work
> on it for quite a while.
not sure how about -current but in 1.5.2 lfs is definitely not
fully reliable while ffs IS.


> Wojciech's assessment of its speed characteristics is pretty good, I'd add
> that LFS does well with parallel file writes to different directories (no
> seek between files).  Parallel "tar x", for example, does very well.
it makes huge difference in case of for example unpacking pkgsrc.