From Fedora Project Wiki
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
== Not loosing functions, which worked with ext4 == | == Not loosing functions, which worked with ext4 == | ||
* | === Encryption === | ||
* Is there plan to utilize dm-crypt or do you want to reimplement whole encryption in btrfs? On the wiki page are a little misleading information about btrfs/dm-crypt https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas | |||
* Missing swap file support in combination with missing encryption removes very important Fedora feature (fully encrypted laptops). [[User:mmaslano|mmaslano]] 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
* Don't remove initramfs, it's used for decryption of data.[[User:mmaslano|mmaslano]] 20:11, 3 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
* Working with quota must be still possible. [[User:mmaslano]] | === Quota ==== | ||
* Working with quota must be still possible. Missing quota means that some installations (like ftp servers etc) has no ability to limit space for users. [[User:mmaslano|mmaslano]] 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
* Ask anaconda guys, how would they handle it. Preferably, add easier change of fs in installer. [[User:mmaslano]] 19:21, 3 June 2011 (GMT) | === Anaconda === | ||
* Ask anaconda guys, how would they handle it. Preferably, add easier change of fs in installer. [[User:mmaslano|mmaslano]] 19:21, 3 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
* fsck must worked. It should be tested for a longer period to see if it's really working. Probably good test suite would be nice. [[User:mmaslano]] | === Recovery strategy === | ||
* fsck must worked. It should be tested for a longer period to see if it's really working. Probably good test suite would be nice. When fsck is planned to be commited to upstream btrfs-progs? http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git;a=summary Another thing, why there are no recent commits and why Fedora has patches, which are not in upstream? [[User:mmaslano|mmaslano]] 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT) | |||
* Is there instruction how to handle situation like disk failure? | |||
== Stability of filesystem == | == Stability of filesystem == | ||
Revision as of 13:34, 7 June 2011
I understand it'll be a lot of work, but wouldn't this be an excellent moment to introduce grub2, which has btrfs support already, iirc? Wzzrd 05:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I think we should be good to keep desktop integration in mind here too. It is no good to have filesystem features exposed in anaconda, and then have no UI in the installed system to deal with it. --mclasen 18:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Now would also probably be a good time to start setting up QA test cases. Jdulaney 008, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Not loosing functions, which worked with ext4
Encryption
- Is there plan to utilize dm-crypt or do you want to reimplement whole encryption in btrfs? On the wiki page are a little misleading information about btrfs/dm-crypt https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Gotchas
- Missing swap file support in combination with missing encryption removes very important Fedora feature (fully encrypted laptops). mmaslano 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT)
- Don't remove initramfs, it's used for decryption of data.mmaslano 20:11, 3 June 2011 (GMT)
Quota =
- Working with quota must be still possible. Missing quota means that some installations (like ftp servers etc) has no ability to limit space for users. mmaslano 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT)
Anaconda
- Ask anaconda guys, how would they handle it. Preferably, add easier change of fs in installer. mmaslano 19:21, 3 June 2011 (GMT)
Recovery strategy
- fsck must worked. It should be tested for a longer period to see if it's really working. Probably good test suite would be nice. When fsck is planned to be commited to upstream btrfs-progs? http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mason/btrfs-progs-unstable.git;a=summary Another thing, why there are no recent commits and why Fedora has patches, which are not in upstream? mmaslano 15:25, 7 June 2011 (GMT)
- Is there instruction how to handle situation like disk failure?
Stability of filesystem
All btrfs bugs should be reviewed and the important will be added into tracking bug for blockers of btrfs.
Candidates:
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=710534 User:mmaslano 19:21, 3 June 2011 (GMT)
- https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=689127 User:mmaslano 19:21, 3 June 2011 (GMT)