On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:30 AM George R Goffe via test
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I was reading about filesystems in Linux, specifically RedHat systems, and
> there was a lot about btrfs and how good it is.
>
> With this in mind, I tried to install my favorite Fedora Core system
> (Currently FC33) uner
Hello George,
BTRFS is definitely supported by Anaconda. I installed Fedora 33
Silverblue Rawhide onto BTRFS. I believe the installer uses a default
layout if you choose the btrfs option with automatic partition layout.
Of course I haven't tried a VM of it.
F32 (current stable release) is able to d
On 7/20/20 21:34, Michel Alexandre Salim wrote:
That's a misleading log message; see e.g. this discussion
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=231884
You probably want to use this to check the actual RAID level.
btrfs filesystem df /
source:
https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Use
On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 14:38 -0400, pmkel...@frontier.com wrote:
>
> Also, I don't understand why this is raid6 There is only one disk in
> my
> test machine. Also I did nothing in the btrfs settings to call for a
> raid. I just took the btrfs defaults.
>
That's a misleading log message; see e.g
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 7:19 PM Chris Murphy
wrote:
> I think the test case just needs to be enhanced with a better grep to
> exclude the raid6 module's message; while still including FAT, XFS,
> ext4, and adding the new Btrfs treelog message. I'm not good enough
> with grep to do that sanely.
>
On Sat, Jul 11, 2020 at 10:26 AM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/9/20 10:31, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
> > wrote:
> >
> >> However as I look at the journal it's not
> >>> clear if this is a problem or if we need to update the testcase f
On 7/9/20 10:31, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
However as I look at the journal it's not
clear if this is a problem or if we need to update the testcase for
btrfs. I've attached the journal file for your reading pleasure.
This is a good po
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
> However as I look at the journal it's not
> > clear if this is a problem or if we need to update the testcase for
> > btrfs. I've attached the journal file for your reading pleasure.
This is a good point. The testcase needs two update
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:46 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
>
> I have been testing btrfs in a fresh install of Rawhide 0703 WS. I've
> mostly been doing my home grown "as deployed testing". So far the only
> potential maybe problem I can see is when I do the
> (QA:Testcase_base_reboot_unmount) I
On 7/6/20 19:53, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 7:43 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
I was not
successful in getting the disk configuration set in a configuration that
Anaconda would accept for installation.
Yeah, custom installation is a little bit of a mind-screw. :(
You are t
On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 7:43 PM pmkel...@frontier.com
wrote:
>
>
> After the QA meeting today, I spent a few hours trying the get Rawhide
> 0703 WS Live installed with btrfs.
>
> I have Rawhide 0703 WS Live on a thumb drive. I know this works fine
> when taking the default for the disk. I was tryi
On 8/28/19 3:13 PM, pmkel...@frontier.com wrote:
I've probably misunderstood some of this. Please feel free to let me know where my
mistakes are.
The btrfs filesystem has been in development for years. It entered into the kernel
in 2009. Red Hat even had an engineer working on it, but he le
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 15:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> 2.
>
> Custom partitioning does not allow convenient removal of volume
> including snapshots (btrfs, LVM)
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1185117
>
> This might seem like it snuck up on us, but I predicted it would
> become a
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:32 PM, Adam Williamson
wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 15:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> Proposal is to submit them to FESCo to a.) acknowledge they're
>> blockers;
>
> I don't see any need for FESCo to do that. We have a process for
> deciding whether bugs are blocke
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 15:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
> Why? Process. I think it's better to adhere to process, and thus far
> there's a rather obvious resistance to fixing these two bugs in the
> Fedora 22 time frame. So here's an alternative approach.
I'll note that we've never violated process
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 15:35 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> Proposal is to submit them to FESCo to a.) acknowledge they're
> blockers;
I don't see any need for FESCo to do that. We have a process for
deciding whether bugs are blockers. If what you really want is a FESCo-
shaped stick to wave at d
On Tue, 2014-11-25 at 14:48 -0500, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
> Now that I am into the install, I can see how my choices are set up.
> Rather obscure that 'standard' means EXT4.
Well, what it means is 'filesystems directly on partitions' rather than
any more complex LVM/btrfs volume-management setu
On Thu, 2011-09-01 at 23:09 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
> Somehow this got built as a F-15 package but ended up in the F-16
> Branched repo, signed by the F-15 GPG key which makes yum not happy
> since it can't find the F-15 key. Is there some reason why F-16
> packages aren't being built for th
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 19:03:26 -0700,
Rob Healey wrote:
>
> Is there any timeline for when fc16's filesystem will be defaulted to btrfs
> and become the primary file system? When is the forced upgrade to btrfs
> coming???
I doubt there will ever be a forced upgrade to brtfs.
According to th
On 07/16/2011 09:03 PM, Rob Healey wrote:
> Is there any timeline for when fc16's filesystem will be defaulted to
> btrfs and become the primary file system? When is the forced upgrade
> to btrfs coming???
If you use preupgrade or yum to upgrade between Fedora releases you will
never have your
Rob Healey gmail.com> writes:
> ...
Do you have this package installed ?
yum-presto
JB
--
test mailing list
test@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
21 matches
Mail list logo
