On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@opensuse.org> wrote:
On 15 September 2016 at 20:41, Chris Murphy <lists@colorremedies.com> wrote:
Even in the current version of btrfs-progs the fsck with --repair is listed as do not use except under advisement by a developer, and as being dangerous. And then there are a bunch of other repairs, zero-log, chunk-recover, super-recover, init-csum-tree, init-extent-tree, and so on. It's hard to know what to do and in what order, more difficult than any other file system on Linux. So it goes from easy to WTF very quickly.
You mean unless you read the documentation?
Easy = you mount it and it fixes itself. WTF = you go read multiple pages of documentation, and also ask on the list, how to fix your problem because depending on the problem you have, depends on which tool with which options you use to fix it. The btrfs check --repair tool is very clearly not intended for regular users, not least of which is it's still marked as do not use / dangerous in three places in all versions of the documentation. No other file system has an fsck that's explicitly not fail safe. People continue to lose their file systems due to bugs that creep into the fsck tool. There is no in between. As soon as you have a Btrfs that will not mount, or only mounts read-only, unlike all other file systems, the fsck is the last choice on the list, not the first choice on the list. Having to read documentation to learn that fact is the opposite of easy. Easy is "oh just use the fsck" like every other file system. Nope, not Btrfs, that has a good chance of blowing things up. And BTW a conversation about this very issue has been going on over at linux-btrfs@ for the last week. It's widely regarded as a problem. -- Chris Murphy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org