Re: btrfs
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> wrote:
> I believe one of us misread Russell. :) I thought he meant "While I
> understand that you'll be crapped on if a kernel upload eats data, I
> think it would be ok to ...". As I read it, he's not expecting them to
> do anything *more* than they already do, just to relax the protection
> argument a little when it comes to people who are already aiming at
> their feet.
Yes. Also anyone who really wants their data to be safe won't use Unstable
anyway.
BTRFS is a little different to most kernel features, it is significant (both
in terms of potential benefits and changes), it has a high profile, and it
needs a lot of testing.
I would not consider asking the kernel team to do anything special for a
random device driver or anything else of similar scope.
But it has been pointed out a few times (including a couple of private
messages) that experimental has what I desire (thanks for the advice
everyone). Now I've discovered that firmware-linux-nonfree doesn't seem to
be available so I can't use my e100 Ethernet ports (which are essential for
the test machine in question).
On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, Alexey Salmin <alexey.salmin@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it's reasonable for package maintainers to check compatibility
> with the kernel from the
> distribution they upload package to. Especialy here when package is
> newer then kernel driver.
> It's of course harder to supervise the situation when kernel pass
> ahead of user-space packages
> but it's also possible.
In general I agree that user-space tools should not be uploaded until there is
a kernel that can work with them. The fact that I made a filesystem with
mkfs.btrfs and can't mount it is obviously not ideal. Of course with this
type of change if the upload of the btrfs-tools had been delayed so that the
kernel got in first then we would STILL have had the same situation (I
believe that there was neither forward nor backward compatibility).
--
russell@coker.com.au
http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Main Blog
http://doc.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog
Reply to:
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: btrfs
- From: The Fungi <fungi@yuggoth.org>
- Re: btrfs
- From: Alexey Salmin <alexey.salmin@gmail.com>
- Re: btrfs
- From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
- References:
- btrfs
- From: Russell Coker <russell@coker.com.au>
- Re: btrfs
- From: Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org>
- Re: btrfs
- From: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>