On Wednesday 06 January 2010, TARUISI Hiroaki wrote:
> Thanks for your greetings.
>
> I read your article, and could follow your idea, which looks
> very practical rule to me.
> But we may need some application which support to create or maintain
> these rules because the relation mount point and
On Wednesday 06 January 2010 01.30:35 TARUISI Hiroaki wrote:
> In creating snapshots, the last argument implies the directory
> where subvolume is to be created, but in taking snapshots,
> the last argument implies subvolume we take snapshot of, and
> snapshots are created under current directory.
Hi,
We can delete snapshot with btrfsctl -D . It's available for
your btrfs-progs version.
And parameters of btrfsctl -s/S are not coherent at the last
argument.
In creating snapshots, the last argument implies the directory
where subvolume is to be created, but in taking snapshots,
the last argu
Thanks for your greetings.
I read your article, and could follow your idea, which looks
very practical rule to me.
But we may need some application which support to create or maintain
these rules because the relation mount point and subvolumes and
snapshots gets complicated as number of subvolumes
Should I take it by the lack of list response that I should just flush
this partition down the toilet and start over? Or is everybody either
flummoxed or on vacation?
Steve
On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 16:37 -0800, Steve Freitas wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-01-03 at 14:57 -0800, Steve Freitas wrote:
> > Got so
Hi,
Does btrfs support snapshot or/and subvolume removal ?
If yes how, since I could not find the commands to do that?
If not is there any estimation when this feature will be available?
Is there a tool to list the existing subvolumes/snapshots?
It looks like the snapshots can overridden by sub
Check for for NULL pointer in btrfs_set_acl and omit calling
posix_acl_equiv_mode in this case to avoid NULL pointer dereference there.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Hirte
diff --git a/fs/btrfs/acl.c b/fs/btrfs/acl.c
index 2e9e699..3a3a96d 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/acl.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/acl.c
@@ -111,13
Hi!
btrfsctl returns 1 on success and 0 if an error occurs.
This has already been reported[0]. Has the patch not been applied
intentionally or did it just slip through?
Cheers,
Robert
[0] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.btrfs/3878
--
plain text within encrypted emails prefe
Dave Chinner wrote:
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 11:27:48AM -0500, Chris Mason wrote:
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 11:11:46AM -0500, ty...@mit.edu wrote:
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 02:46:31AM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
[1] http://samba.org/ftp/tridge/dbench/README
Was not abl
