[arch-general] BTRFS, Rollback, Grub2
Hello List! I can't seem to get rollback-support from mkinitcpio-btrfs to work properly. I've installed ArchLinux more or less like it is shown in the wiki-article btrfs-on-root: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installing_on_Btrfs_root I changed it some, because I wanted to install ArchLinux on an encrypted btrfs-root. But my root-partition contains a __snapshot folder and an __active subvolume, but no subvolumes for __home and __usr and such, because I want to be able to make complete snapshots of my system. But when I want to create a snapshot, it asks me where I want to do it, but I can't give __snapshot as target-folder, because it don't exists in my system... ;) So: how should my btrfs-root be mounted in order to be able to make full use of the rollback-feature provided by mkinitcpio-btrfs? Thanks in advance for your help, Christian.
Re: [arch-general] BTRFS, Rollback, Grub2
On Mon, 20. Aug 13:49, C Anthony Risinger wrote: text added by mvmf mail filter mvmda: regcomp failed. mvmda: regcomp failed. mvmda: regcomp failed. end of text added by mvmf mail filter On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 7:53 AM, 1126 mailingli...@elfsechsundzwanzig.de wrote: Hello List! I can't seem to get rollback-support from mkinitcpio-btrfs to work properly. I've installed ArchLinux more or less like it is shown in the wiki-article btrfs-on-root: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installing_on_Btrfs_root I changed it some, because I wanted to install ArchLinux on an encrypted btrfs-root. But my root-partition contains a __snapshot folder and an __active subvolume, but no subvolumes for __home and __usr and such, because I want to be able to make complete snapshots of my system. But when I want to create a snapshot, it asks me where I want to do it, but I can't give __snapshot as target-folder, because it don't exists in my system... ;) So: how should my btrfs-root be mounted in order to be able to make full use of the rollback-feature provided by mkinitcpio-btrfs? Thanks in advance for your help, yeah ... someone or something completely botched that page, to where it neither reflect the original design goals nor improves upon them. far too much noise and pointlessness (like outbound links to FHS ... who the @#$% cares?!) in short, you need something like this in fstab or equiv: /dev/disk/by-label/btrfs-root /var/lib/btrfs-root btrfs defaults,noatime,subvolid=0 0 0 ... you need to mount `subvolid=0` or `subvolid=5` (same thing) somewhere, and make snapshots from there. subvolid 5 (for which 0 is an alias) is hard-coded to the top-level root. maybe try this: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?title=Installing_on_Btrfs_rootoldid=185175 Hey, thanks! I now can create snapshots in __snapshot (/var/lib/btrfs-root/__snapshot), but I can't use rollback ... Might this be due to boot with systemd? Greetings! -- C Anthony
Re: [arch-general] My end-user $0.02 on /etc/rc.conf splitting.
Okay, time to drop my 0.02ยข as well. And I'm pretty sure everything said here in this mail has been said elsewhere as well, but hey... ;) ArchLinux tries to be as KISS as possible. That's true. And I think, it does a pretty good job at that. And switching to systemd with a couple of config-files instead of one rc.conf might seem like a huge step away from this principle, but in fact it ain't. What is rc.conf used for right now anyway? Most of the settings in the rc.conf are set during setup and not changed afterwards. I mean, who changes his locale or his hostname? Then there are deamons, it's really nice to have an array where you enter a name for a startup service and this array is used to start services fifo. Great. But as far as I saw, systemd provides a simple command to add services and the like. And since it works for services, mountpoints and sockets alike, it provides a good and coherent way to work with a lot of your system-admin things... I like that. So.. in my point of view, it's not such a bad thing that rc.conf gets replaced by a couple of other files and a nice cli-interface. For you this change might be a reason to switch to Fedora, you say. I mean, seriously? How is it all handled in Fedora then? Well, I don't now, actually. But I get kinda offended by neglecting the features that ArchLinux really make the best linux distro out there imho: - It's a rolling release distro: You only have to carefully do pacman -Syu to keep your system up-to-date. I started using Linux with Ubuntu and first I really looked forward to a new release, I mean new features, new artwork and all that stuff. But distupgrade nearly always failed and so I re-installed my system every six months. This is not good! With ArchLinux I can spent way more time just using my system instead of playing admin. - It has pacman: Pacman really is KISS. It does its job and it does it really, really good. It's fast and quite simple to use and to configure. - It has PKGBUILD: If you want compile a package due to some patches or extra settings (by using ABS) or if you want to install a package that is not in the official repos, you have to work with PKGBUILD and makepkg. The first being a really nice and easy to grasp file you can read and understand and configure to your own desires, the second being a tool to download the desired software, take care of dependencies and compiling the software. This is just dead-simple and great. KISS again, through and through. - Mentioned a lot of times: the community, the wiki and the mailinglist, the channel. All of them are excellent and outstanding. Well, That's why I am staying with ArchLinux, that's why I came back after enjoying Gentoo for quite a while, that's why I recommend it to people asking me with which Linux they should go. Maybe you really switch to Fedora due to rc.conf losing it's job a little, maybe you just did a great job trolling the list, I'm glad to write down why I really like ArchLinux :) 1126 On Sun, 22. Jul 06:59, fredbezies wrote: text added by mvmf mail filter mvmda: regcomp failed. mvmda: regcomp failed. mvmda: regcomp failed. end of text added by mvmf mail filter Hello. I've read all the arguments of Tom and Ionut. Here is my own $0.02 on it. When I started using archlinux back in end of 2008, the winning point was this file. A centralized one where you can set up a lot of single options. It is *far* simpler to edit /etc/rc.conf to load daemons or modules than editing 2 or 3 files. Killing /etc/rc.conf can't be do so soon. Or you'll see a lot of old users moving their on other distributions. For me it will be a one way ticket to fedora. And I *do hate* this idea. But developpers must know better than users what is the best for the distro. Killing /etc/rc.conf ? Why not. But for me, it is more KISS oriented than /etc/locale.conf, /etc/vconsole.conf, /etc/modprobe.d/*.conf files. As I said, it is my $0.02. Excuse my bad english, I'm no really awake ! -- Frederic Bezies fredbez...@gmail.com
[arch-general] BTRFS + Rollback + Subvolumes
Hello List! After a few years (like two?) of wandering around, I'm finally back using ArchLinux and wonder why I ever went on searching for something better in the first place. Feels good to be home.. Well, I installed ArchLinux a while back on my Laptop and switched yesterday to using btrfs as my fs for everything except boot, because of everything else being encrypted. Okay, I followed the wiki-article Installing btrfs on root (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installing_on_Btrfs_root) and everything went just fine (it does sometimes). So I now have a subvolume __active which represents /, one for home, one for usr and one for var. I then wanted to test the rollback-feature presented to me during boot and created a snapshot of the subvolume __active. I tried using this during, but it obviously fails, because of not having anything in /usr and /var and /home. So, my question (yes, finally) is: Am I missing something or is just not possible to use different subvolumes (like __active, home, usr, var) and being able to rollback your system during boot? As far as I know btrfs-snapshots are not recursive. So wouldn't it be better (being-able-to-rollback-wise) to just have one subvolume so that you can really rollback everything in case something went wrong? Or is there a way to combine the benefits of having different subvolumes and still being able to rollback the system? I hope I am making any sense.. It's still before the first cup of coffee, alas. Thank you in advance, Christian.
