[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC MR: Update btrfs mount options



Hi,

Am 18. Mai 2025 15:21:12 MESZ schrieb Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org>:
>Hi Holger,
>
>Holger Wansing <hwansing@mailbox.org> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 18. Mai 2025 09:31:17 MESZ schrieb Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org>:
>>>On 18/05/2025 at 00:23, Nicholas D Steeves wrote:
>>>> If it needs to have support added, is implementing this for trixie a
>>>> hard NACK?
>>>
>>>I am not the one who can answer to this.
>>
>> IMO this sounds rather experimental, and such work should happen during development cycle and not in freeze period.
>>
>
>What is the subject of "IMO this sounds rather experimental"?  Are you
>referring to the following?

Sorry for bad quoting style.
I dropped the relevant mail part sadly.

That is:
Nicholas D Steeves <sten@debian.org> wrote:
> It would be best if partman-btrfs can override partman-basicfilesystems's
> definitions with a mechanism like `partman-btrfs/debian/partman-btrfs.templates`.
> The problem is that some of the basicfilesystems annotations don't make
> sense in a btrfs context.  For example, "noatime", which tends to be
> essential for btrfs, because btrfs COWs the file rather than updating a
> real inode.

And the above sounds like changing the basic way of how the mount options thing
is working. And this looks "experimental" to me.
Just my two cents


>>> Will creating a `partman-btrfs/debian/partman-btrfs.templates` just work
>>> or does partman-basicfilesystems need work to have support added?
>>
>> As I wrote above with a caveat, btrfs-specific mount option descriptions 
>> could be defined in partman-btrfs templates.
>
>Thus I've submitted an MR that does things in the KISS way using
>partman-basicfilesystems.  I'm also ok with this work going into a point
>release when users of older hardware report regressions such as
>increased power usage due to continuous TRIM (Fedora is still working on
>this).
>
>I've added one user-requested feature (compress=lzo), and the remainder
>of my work is pretty much annotated warnings for mount options that
>users cargo-cult from reddit and various HOWTOs.  I would also be happy
>to write more involved release notes if necessary.
>
>Or are you referring to translator work?  If most translators are burned
>out and don't see the value of my proposed changes at this time then
>I'll understand and accept this.  P.S. I can try a French translation if
>it would help! :)

What about all the other languages?
Note, that the installer is all in all translated into 78 languages.

Adding new translation material at this stage is ... - I have no energy to
repeat this over and over again.


Holger



Reply to: