On Nov 27, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 27.11.13 12:15, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
>
>> On Nov 27, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>>>
>>> Right, it should not set 1 for btrfs.
>>
>> Since it can be mounted rw from the get go, is it going to
On Wed, 27.11.13 12:15, Chris Murphy (li...@colorremedies.com) wrote:
>
>
> On Nov 27, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Chris Murphy
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> In Fedora 20, by default anaconda sets fs_passno in fstab to 1 for / on
> >> btrfs. During of
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> On Nov 27, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Chris Murphy
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> In Fedora 20, by default anaconda sets fs_passno in fstab to 1 for / on
>>> btrfs. During offline updates, this is causi
On Nov 27, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>>
>> In Fedora 20, by default anaconda sets fs_passno in fstab to 1 for / on
>> btrfs. During offline updates, this is causing systemd-fstab-generator to
>> freak out not finding fsck.btrf
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
>
> In Fedora 20, by default anaconda sets fs_passno in fstab to 1 for / on
> btrfs. During offline updates, this is causing systemd-fstab-generator to
> freak out not finding fsck.btrfs.
>
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1034563
In Fedora 20, by default anaconda sets fs_passno in fstab to 1 for / on btrfs.
During offline updates, this is causing systemd-fstab-generator to freak out
not finding fsck.btrfs.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1034563
For some time I've been suggesting that fstab should use fs_pa
