On 12/7/15 2:54 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: ... > 2) a section that describes "ro" in btrfs-mount(5) which describes that > normal "ro" alone may cause changes on the device and which then refers > to hard-ro and/or the list of options (currently nologreplay) which are > required right now to make it truly ro. > > > I think this is important as an end-user probably expects "ro" to be > truly ro,
Yeah, I don't know that this is true. It hasn't been true for over a decade (2?), with the most widely-used filesystem in linux history, i.e. ext3. So if btrfs wants to go on this re-education crusade, more power to you, but I don't know that it's really a fight worth fighting. ;) > so if he looks it up in the documentation (2) he should find > enough information that this isn't the case and what to do instead. > Further, as one might expect that in the future, other places (than > just the log) may cause changes to a device, even though mounted ro... > I think it's better for the end user to also have a real "hard-ro" like > option, than a possibly growing list of "noXYZ" where the end-user may > have no clue that something else is now also required to get the truly > read-only behaviour. # blockdev --setro ... -Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
