Looks like my original patch got held up at moderation, so trying
again from a different address. This patch removes the need for a
special anaconda option to install onto BTRFS, which has become stable
enough for wider testing. This is based on what is done for XFS, so
hopefully it's right. Thanks,
Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@redhat.com>
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
This looks like it would work. I wonder if it's the right time to do
this, though. What's btrfs support look like in the kernel and user
space tools? Has it stabilized?
- Chris
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
09-24-2010, 12:05 AM
Josef Bacik
Make BTRFS a supported install target
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Chris Lumens <clumens@redhat.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py b/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> index c3ea79c..0d01fd4 100644
>> --- a/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> +++ b/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> @@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ class BTRFS(FS):
>> * * *_linuxNative = True
>> * * *_bootable = False
>> * * *_maxLabelChars = 256
>> - * *_supported = False
>> + * *_supported = True
>> * * *_dump = True
>> * * *_check = True
>> * * *_packages = ["btrfs-progs"]
>> @@ -1125,15 +1125,6 @@ class BTRFS(FS):
>> * * * * *argv = ["-r", "%dm" % (self.targetSize,), self.device]
>> * * * * *return argv
>>
>> - * *@property
>> - * *def supported(self):
>> - * * * *""" Is this filesystem a supported type? """
>> - * * * *supported = self._supported
>> - * * * *if flags.cmdline.has_key("btrfs"):
>> - * * * * * *supported = self.utilsAvailable
>> -
>> - * * * *return supported
>> -
>> *register_device_format(BTRFS)
>
> This looks like it would work. *I wonder if it's the right time to do
> this, though. *What's btrfs support look like in the kernel and user
> space tools? *Has it stabilized?
>
Yes as of 2.6.35 it's mostly feature complete and very stable.
Hopefully by the time F15 actually gets released we'll have a working
fsck as well. Thanks,
Josef
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
09-24-2010, 12:05 AM
Josef Bacik
Make BTRFS a supported install target
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 1:13 PM, Chris Lumens <clumens@redhat.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py b/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> index c3ea79c..0d01fd4 100644
>> --- a/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> +++ b/pyanaconda/storage/formats/fs.py
>> @@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ class BTRFS(FS):
>> * * *_linuxNative = True
>> * * *_bootable = False
>> * * *_maxLabelChars = 256
>> - * *_supported = False
>> + * *_supported = True
>> * * *_dump = True
>> * * *_check = True
>> * * *_packages = ["btrfs-progs"]
>> @@ -1125,15 +1125,6 @@ class BTRFS(FS):
>> * * * * *argv = ["-r", "%dm" % (self.targetSize,), self.device]
>> * * * * *return argv
>>
>> - * *@property
>> - * *def supported(self):
>> - * * * *""" Is this filesystem a supported type? """
>> - * * * *supported = self._supported
>> - * * * *if flags.cmdline.has_key("btrfs"):
>> - * * * * * *supported = self.utilsAvailable
>> -
>> - * * * *return supported
>> -
>> *register_device_format(BTRFS)
>
> This looks like it would work. *I wonder if it's the right time to do
> this, though. *What's btrfs support look like in the kernel and user
> space tools? *Has it stabilized?
>
Yes as of 2.6.35 it's mostly feature complete and very stable.
Hopefully by the time F15 actually gets released we'll have a working
fsck as well. Thanks,
Josef
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
Make BTRFS a supported install target
