On 07/21/2017 04:41 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> If you don't want to have all your eggs in one red basket, but still
> prefer a more conservative approach, you could consider status quo for
> cloud/atomic host installations; and just move workstation-ostree to
> Btrfs. It's not that widely used
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:16:16AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> This is a followup to this:
>> Figure out comprehensive strategy for atomic host container storage
>> https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/281
>>
>> I said I'd post something to
On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 10:16:16AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> This is a followup to this:
> Figure out comprehensive strategy for atomic host container storage
> https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/281
>
> I said I'd post something to the Btrfs devel list about combining
> Btrfs and overlayfs; and
This is a followup to this:
Figure out comprehensive strategy for atomic host container storage
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/281
I said I'd post something to the Btrfs devel list about combining
Btrfs and overlayfs; and I got back a couple interesting replies
including, "We've been running B
