> my main issue is that btrfs is advanced and we have much to think > about the way we want to include it. rollback support and friends are > very cool (this just saved me the other day actually) and i think > would provide a great benefit to the arch rolling model. additionally its not as simple as other FS's. the subvolume/pooling aspect of btrfs means that if you wanted your /var to be compressed, your /home to be (insert mount options), and your root to be (insert mount options), all RAID10 across 4 devices... you would mkfs.btrfs ONCE, then create individual subvols for each. methinks w/o looking at AIF code that this is rather exotic compared to the partition-per-FS options currently available. i just think it's a good idea to start thinking about and integrating all of this now, as btrfs is evolving rapidly and there is a tremendous amount of community interest in it across all distros. btrfs was merged at .29, declared ready for early adopters in .32, and gaining interesting features + stability all the time. i believe it will be "declared stable" sooner than some may think. and rollback is super useful, and would be a natural addition to the Arch's rolling model... afiak the Fedora 13 rollback is mostly useless; the hook i have created is more featureful, which makes Arch the only distro truly supporting btrfs rollbacks :-) (not OOTB however...) C Anthony
