Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54

Thread: OpenSUSE Looks To Switch To Btrfs For Next Release

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    From linus' git, also known as 3.12-rc1+ (a version later than what OpenSuse is shipping): Does that sound stable or finished to anyone?
    That configuration snippet needs to be updated. The more current status update is at https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page "The filesystem disk format is no longer unstable, and it's not expected to change unless there are strong reasons to do so. If there is a format change, file systems with a unchanged format will continue to be mountable and usable by newer kernels. The Btrfs code base is under heavy development. Every effort is being made to keep it stable and fast. Due to the fast development speed, the state of development of the filesystem improves noticeably with every new Linux version, so it's recommended to run the most modern kernel possible. "

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    If a user on this forum can explain what I did wrong or what I missed when it came to OpenSuse's repositories, I would really appreciate an answer. Also, I think that OpenSuse should come out with a true rolling release model to compete with the fact that Ubuntu is "always stable" at any point in its release now.
    Have you tried any recent opensuse?

    one click - it cant get any simpler
    most common repos can be found in the community repo list. Select what you want and go.
    if by chance you need a custom repo it usually comes down to a single url.

    Quote Originally Posted by RahulSundaram View Post
    "The filesystem disk format is no longer unstable ... The Btrfs code base is under heavy development
    Seem to be conflicting statements. How can it be stable with expectation for minimal changes, but yet be under heavy development, which suggests many changes. Maybe they were better saying actively developed. Im skeptical right now to move from EXT4 to BTRS.
    Last edited by Pickle; 09-19-2013 at 02:16 PM.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    218

    Default BTRFS for openSUSE 13.2!!!!

    You discuss, as if they want to make it default for 13.1
    I think you misunderstood the artikle, as I did in the first place. Read again. Talk is about switching to BTRFS for 13.2 not 13.1. The suse-news is clear on that:

    "A discussion has been going on about making this future-oriented file system the default on the next openSUSE. That won’t be but btrfs is still a prominent option during installation so any relevant testing and bugfixing will benefit many openSUSE 13.1 users. And, more importantly, we aim for having it default in the future."

    https://news.opensuse.org/2013/09/19...1-beta-is-out/

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,908

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pickle View Post
    Seem to be conflicting statements. How can it be stable with expectation for minimal changes, but yet be under heavy development, which suggests many changes. Maybe they were better saying actively developed. Im skeptical right now to move from EXT4 to BTRS.
    It means the format on disk is stable (and compatible between releases) but the code in the kernel is changing a lot. The same way you can define a stable h.264 format years ago, while constantly updating the x264 project code to add improvements.

    Basically, it means that you may run into bugs (or more likely bug fixes/enhancements) with all the changes going on, but it shouldn't become incompatible or completely stop working just because of a kernel update.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    30

    Default

    You can also just put your critical data for example your $HOME under a different partition using ext3/4 and the rest (/) under btrfs and play with it and help with the testing process. For my desktop workload it's been perfectly stable so far.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    Unexact comparison:
    bugs reported last 12 months according to https://bugzilla.kernel.org/query.cgi
    btrfs - 79
    ext4 - 26
    Seems sort of unfair doesn't it? Go back a year before 1st major distro deployment of ext4 and count bugs... that still might not be "fair" or "correct", but better than what you did.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    621

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    [LIST][*]Installing a different version of KDE that didn't come with the installation requires to match up several repositoires. It isn't intuitive at all. Why would you want to only update KDE applications only when the next big point release has quite a number of Plasma Workspace fixes? Plus, it seems pointless now that Plasma 1 is in maintaince mode.
    Well the reason there's the KDE Applications only repo is that there are some people who only want to update the applications for some reason without updating the rest of the SC.

    However I personally find the KDE Repo system to be very intuitive in that I set the Repo to the KDE SC version I want, update the Repos when there's a major release and just update everything and continue.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cjcox View Post
    Seems sort of unfair doesn't it? Go back a year before 1st major distro deployment of ext4 and count bugs... that still might not be "fair" or "correct", but better than what you did.
    Default file system should be stable. Btrfs seems to be alpha quality software according to latest bugs in kernel bugzilla. It seems there is no or not enough dedicated tester(s) and developers depend on proper testing by users. Btrfs should become default file system only when number of new bugs will be close to zero.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,395

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    I get that Yast is different (and that's not a bad thing) but installing common applications that are needed right away is not a friendly way to teach new users how to add Yast repositories.
    You don't add repositories manually most of the time. You go to http://software.opensuse.org and enter the package name to the search box, then press 1-Click Install and the repository gets added for you automatically. And when you do need to add them manually, the URL is found in the wiki, and the process of adding it is straight-forward.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    Installing a different version of KDE that didn't come with the installation requires to match up several repositoires. It isn't intuitive at all. Why would you want to only update KDE applications only when the next big point release has quite a number of Plasma Workspace fixes? Plus, it seems pointless now that Plasma 1 is in maintaince mode.
    Eh? No, you just add KDE:Release:410 or so, then press the "replace system packages" button in the package manager, and your KDE gets upgraded to the SC of your choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    It seems that the rolling release is actually a repository that depends on a stable installation. Also, users need to reinstall properiary graphic drivers themselves if they use Tumbleweed (thankfully, I have Intel hardware).
    And how is that bad? You need to start somewhere. As for the proprietary drivers, not much you can do about it due to the constantly changing graphics stack components. Reinstalling isn't hard, too.

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    The milestones releases works differently then most distros. They seem to contain their own repository and don't seem to update at all until the next milestone release. For instance, if one milestone comes out a week before a beta 2 version of some software comes out, you have to wait three weeks for the next milestone to come out in order to get it.
    No, you can just get it off build service packages. There's no reason to update milestones, because all the development is going towards the new version anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pickle View Post
    Seem to be conflicting statements. How can it be stable with expectation for minimal changes, but yet be under heavy development, which suggests many changes. Maybe they were better saying actively developed. Im skeptical right now to move from EXT4 to BTRS.
    Stable API, heavily developed ABI. And there is no actual difference between heavy and active development.

    Quote Originally Posted by JS987 View Post
    Default file system should be stable. Btrfs seems to be alpha quality software according to latest bugs in kernel bugzilla. It seems there is no or not enough dedicated tester(s) and developers depend on proper testing by users. Btrfs should become default file system only when number of new bugs will be close to zero.
    So EXT4 is alpha quality and must not be default, got it.

    And this is exactly what they're doing, inviting testers. I've been "testing" the FS for a few years now (so it's less testing and more using) and haven't had any huge issues with it at all. And don't forget that Snapper is an openSUSE project, too. Without Snapper you don't experience the whole potential of Btrfs.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreatEmerald View Post
    And this is exactly what they're doing, inviting testers. I've been "testing" the FS for a few years now (so it's less testing and more using) and haven't had any huge issues with it at all. And don't forget that Snapper is an openSUSE project, too. Without Snapper you don't experience the whole potential of Btrfs.
    Proper testing needs automated tests created by testers running 24/7 on dedicated servers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •