Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: Fedora 17 Is Still Trying For Btrfs By Default

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,912

    Default Fedora 17 Is Still Trying For Btrfs By Default

    Phoronix: Fedora 17 Is Still Trying For Btrfs By Default

    The Fedora / Red Hat developers working on the Beefy Miracle are tentatively moving ahead with their plan to use Btrfs as the default Linux file-system for Fedora 17 and beyond...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTA1NDQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    25

    Default

    lets see now how good the redhat developer

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    79

    Default

    lands in alpha
    That means feature freeze i.e today which is not going to happen so it is moved to F18.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drago01 View Post
    That means feature freeze i.e today which is not going to happen so it is moved to F18.
    for what he said they have two weeks from now soo ignore the feature freeze date.

    you will know in two week

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nir2142 View Post
    for what he said they have two weeks from now soo ignore the feature freeze date.

    you will know in two week
    Not true.
    Read the chat logs (note I actually was present in this meeting) ... the whole discussion was about making it in time for the feature freeze (i.e today) after that F17 gets branched off and new stuff (like switching the default filesystem) will only be allowed in rawhide (the quote in the article might suggested something else but it was taken out of context).

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    117

    Default

    Btrfs by default? Pfff. Even ext4 is a lot better than btrfs for general use. Maybe someday we'll all be using SSD drives... until then btrfs just sucks.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    115

    Default

    If Fedora is just going to symlink things together, why can't they go step farther and symlink /usr to the actual folder "/system"? Why keep the "usr" in the first place? "usr" doesn't even come close to describe what the folder is actually used for? You know... because "usr" looks like "user" (but user settings is saved at "/home". Wouldn't that make things more simpler to unserstand?

    Why not just get rid of the old system and have:
    /system
    ----/bin
    ----/lib
    ----/sbin
    ----you guys get the idea...
    /config (instead of /etc)
    /user (instead of /home)

    I'm just wondering why some say that the traditional Unix file heirachy is outdated (even though I agree with with that statement) but still want to use the same non-descriptive terms!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,796

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by halo9en View Post
    Btrfs by default? Pfff. Even ext4 is a lot better than btrfs for general use. Maybe someday we'll all be using SSD drives... until then btrfs just sucks.
    Yes, but btrfs needs lots of testing, which is what Fedora is about. If Fedora and its users (=people willing to be beta testers) didn't exist, Linux software in general would be much more buggy.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    If Fedora is just going to symlink things together, why can't they go step farther and symlink /usr to the actual folder "/system"? Why keep the "usr" in the first place? "usr" doesn't even come close to describe what the folder is actually used for? You know... because "usr" looks like "user" (but user settings is saved at "/home". Wouldn't that make things more simpler to unserstand?
    Because that would violate the FHS.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CTown View Post
    If Fedora is just going to symlink things together, why can't they go step farther and symlink /usr to the actual folder "/system"? Why keep the "usr" in the first place? "usr" doesn't even come close to describe what the folder is actually used for? You know... because "usr" looks like "user" (but user settings is saved at "/home". Wouldn't that make things more simpler to unserstand?
    User Shared or System Resources is what I get when I google that.

    Though, that's not very intuitive to begin with, so meh.
    Last edited by Edogaa; 02-08-2012 at 04:16 AM.

Posting Permissions

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