Re: Antw: [EXT] Re: the need for a discoverable sub-volumes specification

[Chris Murphy <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 3:40 AM Ulrich Windl
<Ulrich.Windl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >>> Ludwig Nussel <ludwig.nussel@xxxxxxx> schrieb am 21.12.2021 um 14:57 in
> Nachricht <662e1a92-beb4-e1f1-05c9-e0b38e40eb1e@xxxxxxx>:
>
> ...
> > The way btrfs is used in openSUSE is based on systems from ten years
> > ago. A lot has changed since then. Now with the idea to have /usr on a
> > separate read-only subvolume the current model doesn't really work very
> > well anymore IMO. So I think there's a window of opportunity to change
> > the way openSUSE does things :-)
>
> Oh well, while you are doing so: Also improve support for a separate /boot
> volume when snapshotting.

Yeah how to handle /boot gives me headaches. We have a kind of
rollback, the possibility of choosing among kernels. But which kernels
are bootable depends on the /usr its paired with. We need a mechanism
to match /boot and /usr together, so that the user doesn't get stuck
choosing a kernel version for which the modules don't exist in an
older generation /usr. And then does this imply some additional
functionality in the bootloader to achieve it, or should this
information be fully encapsulated in Boot Loader Spec compliant
snippets?


-- 
Chris Murphy