On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 1:45 PM Dennis Katsonis <denn...@netspace.net.au> wrote: > I think my previous e-mail did not go through. Basically, if it is > assumed that a btrfs-receive operation will result in a subvolume which > matches the source file for file, then this assumption or expectation > won't be met if one deletes files from the subvolume at the receiving > end which is going to be referred to as the parent. >
This is oxymoron. btrfs send/receive apply to read-only subvolumes. You are not able to modify them. As soon as you remove read-only bit, you are fully responsible for consequences. > This can happen inadvertently, It cannot. You do not inadvertently make subvolume read-write. And if you do, you are expected to know what you are doing. That said, better if btrfs did not allow flipping read-only bit in the first place. > or even through filesystem corruption > (which I experienced). > And if corruption happened after applying changes? End result in the same. Of course it would be perfect if btrfs could notice and warn you, I just do not see how it can realistically be implemented.
