On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Billy Crook wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 19:34, ivo welch wrote:
>> curiosity question---could btrfs be licensed in multiple ways to allow
>> Apple and other vendors to adopt it?
>
> Great question, Ivo.
>
> And it turns out, btrfs is already licensed to permi
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 19:34, ivo welch wrote:
> curiosity question---could btrfs be licensed in multiple ways to allow
> Apple and other vendors to adopt it?
Great question, Ivo.
And it turns out, btrfs is already licensed to permit commercial use,
integration into other products, and resale.
thx, ed.
this is a case where I am wondering whether EVERYONE, including all
the commercial contributors to btrfs, would be better off with another
additional license that also allowed kernel integration for companies
like Apple. the decision-making (and rights) for btrfs are so
dispersed, howev
> From: linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-btrfs-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of ivo welch
>
> curiosity question---could btrfs be licensed in multiple ways to allow
> Apple and other vendors to adopt it?
No. The source code is copyrighted by many different entities, and th
curiosity question---could btrfs be licensed in multiple ways to allow
Apple and other vendors to adopt it? as end users, having one good
file system that works everywhere as a main root system would be
heaven...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body
Telling someone (that has a ~2 week stale backup) that they should
have kept backups is hardly constructive. We're all aware there's no
official btrfs repair tool. But it appears there has been been some
hard, dedicated work towards this that has resulted in many commits
and patches. I'm here to
"Soon" seems a bit subjective given that the devs have been touting
this since the beginning of time.
/Helpful/ advice would be nice.
This blog posting
(http://stujordan.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/churning-the-butter/)
sounded promising, but none of the superblock copies on my btrfs
volume are ok,
On 08/14/2011 04:13 PM, Yalonda Gishtaka wrote:
I'm quite desperate
to recover this volume.
You should have had backups.
Btrfs has no file system repair tool, but it is supposed to be out soon
(tm). You will have to wait.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btr
Fajar,
Thank you for the suggestion. Unfortunately, running "sudo
./btrfs-zero-log /dev/mapper/home" results in the same "parent transid
verify failed on 647363842048 wanted 210333 found 210302" errors,
repeated 3 times.
I am running Arch Linux with the latest 3.0.1 kernel on a x86_64 machine.
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 4:13 AM, Yalonda Gishtaka
wrote:
> Halp! I was recently forced to power cycle my desktop PC, and upon
> restart, the btrfs /home volume would no longer mount, citing the
> error "BUG: scheduling while atomic: mount /5584/0x2". I
> retrieved the latest btrfs-progs
Halp! I was recently forced to power cycle my desktop PC, and upon
restart, the btrfs /home volume would no longer mount, citing the
error "BUG: scheduling while atomic: mount /5584/0x2". I
retrieved the latest btrfs-progs git repositories from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/gi
Hello,
trying out btrfs on my linux installation. I am running Funtoo with
Linux 3.0 kernel. After a reboot kernel panicked (no access to error
log since it is my root volume that failed). I get this using a rescue
cd (2.6.38, btrfs v 0.19) and then trying to mount :
[ 752.129118] btrfs bad tree
# uname -a
Linux dhcppc1 3.0.1--std-ipv6-64 #1 SMP Sun Aug 14 17:06:21 CEST
2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
mkdir test5
cd test5
dd if=/dev/null of=img5 bs=1 seek=2G
dd if=/dev/null of=img6 bs=1 seek=2G
losetup /dev/loop2 img5
losetup /dev/loop3 img6
mkfs.btrfs -d raid1 -m raid1 /dev/loop2
And besides deleting is transparent for any programming language and
can be done with no special permissions, while subvolume deletion or
creation is of course not.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More m
Not in all cases you can plan and predict where there will be need for
deleting large number of files. Also subvolumes are difficult to
maintain, not to mention still quite buggy.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.ke
> I wonder if it would be possible to implement instant unlinking
> directory with files in it. Since btrfs is based on b trees it could
> be possible. Filesystem would have to "loose" all information on
> directory and object in it, and allow overwriting this information.
> This would be great fea
16 matches
Mail list logo
