2012/4/25 Josef Bacik <jo...@toxicpanda.com>: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Chris <xchris...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> 2012/4/25 Josef Bacik <jo...@toxicpanda.com>: >>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Colin Walters <walt...@verbum.org> wrote: >>>> On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 12:03 -0400, Josef Bacik wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Tomasz Torcz <to...@pipebreaker.pl> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 01:34:07PM +0200, Matthias Runge wrote: >>>>> >> On 25/04/12 09:48, Vít Ondruch wrote: >>>>> >> > +1. I'd like to see this fixed before final. >>>>> >> Yes, me too. Afaik, SuSE supports btrfs even for their enterprise >>>>> >> distro. >>>>> > >>>>> > For added laughs, SLES does not support read-write ext4. Ext4 >>>>> > read-only support >>>>> > is provided for migrating to btrfs. >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> That's because Btrfs is way more stable than ext4, >>>> >>>> [citation needed] >>>> >>> >>> https://twitter.com/#!/josefbacik/status/195190540529184768 >> >> Is this a joke? Btrfs more stable than ext4??? Not really??? >> > > According to the stab-o-matic stability testing framework[1] btrfs > scores a 63 whereas ext4 scores a 37, so yes, I'm completely serious,
And why is Btrfs marked as experimental by upstream? If it is really more stable than ext4, why does RHEL 6.3 beta not support Btrfs? I am very surprised... -- Chris -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
