> From: zfs-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:zfs-discuss-
> boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Linder, Doug
> All technical reasons aside, I can tell you one huge reason I love ZFS,
and it's
> one that is clearly being completely ignored by btrfs: ease of use.  The
> command set is wonderful and very English-like (for a unix command set).
> It's simple, clear, and logical.  The grammar makes sense.  I almost never
> to refer to the man page.  The last time I looked, the commands for btrfs
> were the usual incomprehensible gibberish with a thousand squiggles and
> numbers.  It looked like a real freaking headache, to be honest.

Maybe you're doing different things from me.  btrfs subvol create, delete,
snapshot, mkfs, ...
For me, both ZFS and BTRFS have "normal" user interfaces and/or command

> 1) Change the stupid name.   "Btrfs" is neither a pronounceable word nor a
> good acromyn.  "ButterFS" sounds stupid.  Just call it "BFS" or something,
> please.

LOL.  Well, for what it's worth, there are three common pronunciations for
btrfs.  Butterfs, Betterfs, and B-Tree FS (because it's based on b-trees.)
Check wikipedia.  (This isn't really true, but I like to joke, after saying
something like that, I wrote the wikipedia page just now.)   ;-)

Speaking of which. zettabyte filesystem.   ;-)  Is it just a dumb filesystem
with a lot of address bits?  Or is it something that offers functionality
that other filesystems don't have?   ....   ;-)

zfs-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to