On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 10:30 AM Lennart Poettering <mzerq...@0pointer.de> wrote: > > On Fr, 26.06.20 10:42, Ben Cotton (bcot...@redhat.com) wrote: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BtrfsByDefault > > If this is decided to be the way to go, please work with kernel > maintainers to make btrfs.ko a built-in kernel module, so that > initrd-less boots work... (it's kinda pointless anyway to have > something as module that is now gonna used by most people anyway, it > just slows things down for little benefit) >
That would make sense if this were decided. My big issue with this is we have no internal RH expertise on btrfs, and would be entirely dependent on the upstream community for support. There are instances of CVEs that get ignored for long periods of time, CVE-2019-19378 and CVE-2019-19448 being the current examples, with the later being not a huge deal, but still an outstanding CVE. In general btrfs CVEs tend to stick around longer than XFS and ext4 before a fix is pushed upstream. The Fedora kernel supports btrfs, it has for quite some time, and that doesn't change regardless of the outcome of this proposal. I honestly cannot tell you what the stability would be like spread across the majority of fedora users, because not being default, the typical btrfs user probably currently has a better understanding of what they are getting into. While the lack of internal RH expertise makes me lean against this proposal, I believe the Desktop SIG with FESCo should be able to make the decisions for defaults on the desktop spin. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
