Re: Btrfs in Silverblue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 09:34:36AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2020, 6:07 AM Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Fr, 10.07.20 06:50, Neal Gompa (ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 6:45 AM Marek Suchánek <msuchane@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I haven't seen any mention of Silverblue in the Btrfs discussions.
> > Will Silverblue also switch to Btrfs if the change is approved?
> > > >
> > > > I've tested installing Silverblue 32 and Rawhide with the default
> > Btrfs partitioning suggested by Anaconda, and in both cases the system
> > failed to boot after installation. It couldn't mount the Btrfs subvolumes.
> > > >
> > > > Is that a known issue or should I report it as a bug?
> > > >
> > >
> > > The expectation is that Silverblue will follow along with Workstation,
> > > yes. We do know about the bug and have a fix proposed to Anaconda:
> > > https://github.com/rhinstaller/anaconda/pull/2720
> >
> > Instead of passing this in each time on the kernel cmdline, maybe just
> > use "btrfs subvol set-default" to se the default subvolume to mount,
> > after mkfs.
> >
> > That makes things a lot more robust, as btrfs will then just work like
> > any other fs even if you insert the root subvol in between like
> > anaconda apparently does.
> >
> > I think there's big value in allowing short kernel cmdlines that are
> > as similar as possible everywhere, instead of blowing it up with
> > different switches for every single case.
> 
> 
> I agree with all of the above, but there is a contra argument. There is
> something to be said about having an understandable system, one that self
> describes how it's assembled, and boots. Changing the default subvolume
> obscures this, and now one of the "connect the dots" steps of boot becomes
> a dot on a completely different page in another book.
> 
> Therefore I'm not certain.

I agree with both of you, but I think the concept of default subvolume
is fairly natural and does not make things more confusing. When I pause
to think about this, I know that the root subvolume is "just a subvolume",
but by default I think of the the root subvolume as the partition itself
and the other subvolumes as less important.  So elevating the root subvolume
to be the default subvolume feels right.

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux