Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: openSUSE 13.1 RC1 Arrives, Btrfs Is "Safe For Users"

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,627

    Default openSUSE 13.1 RC1 Arrives, Btrfs Is "Safe For Users"

    Phoronix: openSUSE 13.1 RC1 Arrives, Btrfs Is "Safe For Users"

    The first release candidate of openSUSE 13.1, which is due for release as stable in November, is now available. With openSUSE 13.1, using the Btrfs file-system should be considered a safe option...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ4MzM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: openSUSE 13.1 RC1 Arrives, Btrfs Is "Safe For Users"

    The first release candidate of openSUSE 13.1, which is due for release as stable in November, is now available. With openSUSE 13.1, using the Btrfs file-system should be considered a safe option...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTQ4MzM

    did i see non free testing in this release of openSUSE? and by the way.
    btrfs should be a safe choice
    They Disabled many BtrFS features to make it safe.
    By default, only the ‘safe’ features of btrfs are enabled in openSUSE

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    944

    Default

    In related news to OpenSuse & Qt5:
    OpenSuSE 12.3 was included in the CI now. It will build with the same configurations as Ubuntu 10.04 and will eventually replace it.
    I'm not sure what it means but I guess it's bad news for Ubuntu and good for OpenSuse.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    715

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mark45 View Post
    In related news to OpenSuse & Qt5:


    I'm not sure what it means but I guess it's bad news for Ubuntu and good for OpenSuse.
    Qt Development has moved away from Ubuntu to openSUSE??

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    Qt Development has moved away from Ubuntu to openSUSE??
    Makes sense: Opensuse has KDE as its most used desktop environment, which in turn is Not only Qt-based (since age) but is slowly evolving as sort of "Qt+" extension collection (Kdelibs has been split into module and some a backported into Qt, the other being converted into extension, and the last part only being KDE-specific stuff). Suse also invests into KDE (developper time, etc).

    Meanwhile: Ubuntu is a mess (with Unity 8 eventually become Qt based once they got their shit together, and Kubuntu being pushed aside by canonical).



    Also :

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: openSUSE 13.1 RC1 Arrives, Btrfs Is "Safe For Users"

    The first release candidate of openSUSE 13.1, which is due for release as stable in November, is now available. With openSUSE 13.1, using the Btrfs file-system should be considered a safe option.

    OpenSUSE 13.1 RC1 is shipping with KDE $.11.2, Linux 3.11 + Lots of Btrfs fixes{...}
    Michael, you let your "SHIFT" key down. That should have been "KDE 4.11.2".

    (I know german beer taste good, but avoid being drunken while posting! just kidding )

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrYak View Post
    Michael, you let your "SHIFT" key down. That should have been "KDE 4.11.2".

    (I know german beer taste good, but avoid being drunken while posting! just kidding )
    Fixed, thanks... Actually, I rarely drink beer these days.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Stable my ass. Btrfs still doesn't have a fully working fsck. One that just detects errors but is unable to do anything about them is not really helping.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Those 25+ btrfs bug fixes have made upstream? They have landed at any 3.12 rcX kernel release?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Saskatchewan, Canada
    Posts
    466

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carewolf View Post
    Stable my ass. Btrfs still doesn't have a fully working fsck. One that just detects errors but is unable to do anything about them is not really helping.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that all ZFS does, too?

    A copy-on-write filesystem should be far less likely to have problems that require fsck.

Posting Permissions

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