On 2011-11-28 09:56, Bartu5 wrote:
>
> Root filesystem got full and hang. After restart (sysrq+reisub) cant get
> it resize to fit max free space because of errors in btrfsck.
So now you know why it is considered experimental software.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)
On 11/28/2011 12:38 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> So now you know why it is considered experimental software.
and why others here reported it like:
“it’s so fragile (IMO FAT is more stable) that it’s not worth trying yet
… not a single tool to recover data” cite http://tinyurl.com/bp2tfkq
"it is EXTREMELY fragile. You can lose entire partition because of power
failure.
I’ve encountered 3 filesystem corruptions and lost my /home twice (but
I had partition backups of course!).
So even though I was excited about it … I wouldn’t recommend it yet.
I even discourage until fsck is available. OR You can end up with ugly
kernel error screen during system boot" cite: http://tinyurl.com/dxbftdf
–
DD
openSUSE®, the “German Engineered Automobiles” of operating systems!
It is a pity that opensuse don’t give a warning about only using Btrfs if you want your data destroyed. Describing it, together with ext4, as improved tends to imply that it is comparable with ext4 which seems to be a good quality file system. The upcoming qualifier to Btrfs is not really a synonym for dangerously experimental
I have just done a clean install of 12.1. I was given a choice of Btrfs and as far as I can remember there as no warning of it being dangerously experimental. However, being careful as usual, I had spent hours going through the forums and had decided that Btrfs appeared to be more of a data shredder than a file system and used ext4 which I have been using on 11.3.
I have not used Btrfs, but from the posts I have seen, it appears to be totally unsuitable for anything other than testing Btrfs and as a result should not be offered as an option on the 12.1 install. People who want it should have to get it via YAST or zypper.
This is yet another thing that helps confirm my belief that opensuse does not care about users of it’s software and especially those who have little understanding of linux
The default file system for openSUSE is still ext4. You can change to Btrfs when you want, but at least you should be that aqaintanced to doing openSUSE installs that you dare to deviate from the standard. Thus IMHO no real niewbie can be easily victim of using it.
IMHO everybody who delibaretly choose to go with Btrfs thought about the consquences before doing so.
And a person doing so is quite welcome here to report problems and ask help from those who do likewise or have Btrfs knowledge otherwise. After all we are users helping users. I guess people using Btrfs are realising that they may be amongst only a few that dare to use it. And we all must be glad that people try these sort of new things out, because this is the only way a product will become a stable product in the end.
Am 28.11.2011 14:53, schrieb Carlos E. R.:
> On 2011-11-28 14:16, hcvv wrote:
>> IMHO everybody who delibaretly choose to go with Btrfs thought about
>> the consquences before doing so.
>
> No, YaST should warn when selecting it that it is experimental. If I see
> something in YaST I expect it to work fine.
>
And I reviewed the technical release notes right now and even there is
no warning about using btrfs or it being only experimental. At least at
this place I would expect to read something like that.
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
Finally manage to win a few gigs of free space with snapper cleanup/delete snapshot - witch seams to magically fix fsck issue Maximizing resize performed well. All looks good from here.
Much obligate for your support, thanks ;]
Am 28.11.2011 16:06, schrieb hcvv:
>
> You are warned here. What can we users do more?
> Go to the devs to tell them.
>
>
You know yourself that this is too late now. Release notes are not
changed after release.
But anyway I will post something to the mailing list because the
situation is even worse.
The “top features” advertises the snapper tool for btrfs which makes it
even more likely that a user who does not follow closely the general
discussions about btrfs gets the impression that it is a good idea to
switch to it.
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
Am 28.11.2011 16:26, schrieb Bartu5:
>
> Finally manage to win a few gigs of free space with snapper
> cleanup/delete snapshot - witch seams to magically fix fsck issue
> Maximizing resize performed well. All looks good from here. Much
> obligate for your support, thanks ;]
>
If I were you I would switch to lvm + ext4 (snapshoting is not as
sophisticated as btrfs but stable), it is what I use. Tested myself one
week btrfs on real hardware and decided that it is to early to switch to
it before proper repair tools are available.
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
I know that it is as it is. But raging here is of no use either.
I guess yoiur aproach is the best you can do.
And here we can only advertise not to use it except when you want it very dearly for some reason.
>> Go to the devs to tell them.
> You know yourself that this is too late now. Release notes are not
> changed after release.
yes, you are right…
BUT, it is important to note that we here (in these fora) have zero
control over how the install is presented to the users during the
install (or in the release notes)!
except we have access to bugzilla…and, i just bet that everyone now
bitching about there not being a flashing red, bold lettered, WARNING
about the dangers of btrfs are not part of any bug raised during the
long period of time (31 May to early Nov) in which it was opportune to
do so…
nor will you find their fingerprints on many RC1 disks, nor their
names/IDs prevalent in the pre-release/beta forum…
–
DD
openSUSE®, the “German Engineered Automobiles” of operating systems!
Am 28.11.2011 16:36, schrieb DenverD:
>>> Go to the devs to tell them.
>> You know yourself that this is too late now. Release notes are not
>> changed after release.
>
> yes, you are right…
>
> BUT, it is important to note that we here (in these fora) have
> zero control over how the install is presented to the users during
> the install (or in the release notes)!
>
The problem is that I tested it and I did not pay attention to the
missing warning in the upcoming release notes simply because it was
clear for me from the very beginning that btrfs is experimental and
lacks repair tools which might come soon or not so soon.
I am afraid for others who tested it is similar.
It is exactly this thread now which makes me aware that the user who
does not follow discussions which happen outside the openSUSE world is
not warned.
Sad.
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
Am 28.11.2011 16:46, schrieb hcvv:
>
> I know that it is as it is. But raging here is of no use either.
> I guess yoiur aproach is the best you can do.
> And here we can only advertise not to use it except when you want it
> very dearly for some reason.
>
>
Where do you see a rant here?
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
I do not know if I see a rant. Maybe it depends on the definition of rant.
What I see is several posters telling each other that putting in Brtfs into 12.1 withput a red flag and warning was no good. They may be right and telling each other the same thing may give people the nice feeling they are not alone in this world. But IMHO in the end it does not help when nobody goes to the correct place.
Do not forget this is in Install/Boot/Login. but this part of this thread looks more like General chitchat. to me.
I hoped that trying to get somebody in filing a bug report, or a feature request or going to the mailing lists, this thread could return to helping the OP. Sorry for trying this in vain.
Am 28.11.2011 18:36, schrieb hcvv:
>
> I do not know if I see a rant. Maybe it depends on the definition of
> rant.
>
Then why do you use that wording?
> What I see is several posters telling each other that putting in Brtfs
> into 12.1 withput a red flag and warning was no good.
Read what was written not what you make out of it it is a difference.
> Do not forget this is in Install/Boot/Login. but this part of this
> thread looks more like General chitchat. to me.
No it is investigating what is the right thing and the right place
telling it the devs is nott. The infos are provided by the marketing
team as I found out meanwhile.
>
> I hoped that trying to get somebody in filing a bug report, or a
> feature request or going to the mailing lists, this thread could return
> to helping the OP. Sorry for trying this in vain.
>
The OP received meaningful answers, your answers did not belong to that
sorry.
Bye.
–
PC: oS 11.4 (dual boot 12.1) 64 bit | Intel Core i7-2600@3.40GHz | KDE
4.6.0 | GeForce GT 420 | 16GB Ram
Eee PC 1201n: oS 11.4 64 bit | Intel Atom 330@1.60GHz | KDE 4.7.3 |
nVidia ION | 3GB Ram
I searched this whole thread for the word “rant”. My browser finds the first occurence, searching from the beginning, in post #17 above. Which is yours.
Maximizing resize performed well. All looks good from here.