> Subject: [PATCH 0/1] btrfs-progs: libbtrfsutil: Relicense to LGPLv2.1+
>
> This is a patch requesting all substantial copyright owners to sign off
> on changing the license of the libbtrfsutil code to LGPLv2.1+ in order
> to resolve various concerns around the mixture of code in btrfs-progs
> wi
Hello,
(It seems that you already have answers but anyway...)
> Came across this podman issue yesterday
> https://github.com/containers/libpod/issues/3963
>
>
> Question 1: For unprivileged use case, is it intentional that the user
> creates a subvolume/snapshot using 'btrfs sub
> create' and
> On Wed 2019-07-17 (08:57), misono.tomoh...@fujitsu.com wrote:
>
> > FYI, this problem should be fixed in mkfs.btrfs >= v4.16 since the
> > top-level subvolume also gets non-empty UUID at mkfs time.
>
> root@fex:~# lsb_release -d
> Description:Ubuntu 18.04
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> [mailto:linux-btrfs-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Hans van Kranenburg
> Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 5:24 PM
> To: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; Ulli Horlacher
>
> Subject: Re: how do I know a subvolume is a snapshot
> -Original Message-
> From: Omar Sandoval [mailto:osan...@osandov.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 10:02 AM
> To: Misono, Tomohiro/味曽野 智礼
> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/8] btrfs-progs: sub: Relax the privileges of
> "subvolume list/show"
>
> On Tue,
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Steigerwald [mailto:mar...@lichtvoll.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 6:48 PM
> To: Misono, Tomohiro
> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/8] btrfs-progs: sub: Relax the privileges
> of "subvolume list/show"
>
> Mis
> -Original Message-
> From: David Sterba [mailto:dste...@suse.cz]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 1:18 AM
> To: Omar Sandoval
> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org; kernel-t...@fb.com; Misono, Tomohiro
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] btrfs-progs: my libbtrfsutil patch queue
>
> On Tue, No
Hello,
fsck-test 006 fails for low-mem mode in current devel branch and bisect points
this.
On 2018/09/13 21:05, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
> Since the inline extent code can be largely self-sufficient, factor
> it out from check_file_extent. No functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Boriso
Hello,
fsck-test 006 fails for low-mem mode in current devel branch and bisect points
this.
> Since the inline extent code can be largely self-sufficient, factor
> it out from check_file_extent. No functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nikolay Borisov
> ---
> check/mode-lowmem.c | 142 ++
