On 01/16/2016 05:52 PM, Anton Aylward wrote:

On 01/16/2016 06:58 PM, don fisher wrote:

...

Please give me the commands, probably to mkfs.btrfs, that allows me to generate the file system that the distribution media provides. I have tried to use the distribution media, but keep having trouble with a clean build on a USB drive.

Does "mkfs.btrfs" not work for you? Its in /usr/sbin/mkfs.btrfs

I do not know what parameters to give mkfs.btrfs to generate a file system like that the distribution generates. I date back to the days of Richard Stevens where a file was just a set of bytes. I know how to mkfs.ext4 and the rest, but do know know all of the parameters for the btrfs. I was hoping for an example, one that would make the distribution file system. I will try to understand the btrfs at a later time. Thanks Don -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2016 08:49 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

Use what is available to you: man mkfs.btrfs google mkfs.btrfs

+1 RTFM! -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Le 17/01/2016 05:08, Carlos E. R. a écrit :

Very possibly about no one knows the exact parameters to use on mkfs.btrfs to create a suitable root partition, unless we find it out in yast source code.

may be in yast2 logs? part of mine: 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] ExternalProgram.cc(start_program):249 Executing 'btrfs' 'subvolume' 'list' '-s' '/var/spool' 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] ExternalProgram.cc(start_program):249 Executing 'btrfs' 'subvolume' 'list' '-s' '/var/lib/pgsql' 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] ExternalProgram.cc(start_program):249 Executing 'btrfs' 'subvolume' 'list' '-s' '/var/log' 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] ExternalProgram.cc(start_program):249 Executing 'btrfs' 'subvolume' 'list' '-s' '/var/lib/mysql' 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] ExternalProgram.cc(start_program):249 Executing 'btrfs' 'subvolume' 'list' '-s' '/var/lib/mariadb' 2016-01-16 09:03:27 <1> linux-us26(3035) [zypp++] jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2016 11:08 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

Very possibly about no one knows the exact parameters to use on mkfs.btrfs to create a suitable root partition, unless we find it out in yast source code.

YAST is going to be more comprehensive than is needed to create a file system for a number of reasons. First, it is going to create sub-volumes, which while nice from a management POV are not a necessity. That fact you could use ext4FS in place of BtrFS on a single volume device is adequate demonstration of this. Can you run BtrFS without sub-volumes? Yes I do. Second, the YAST supports the use of multi-volume and RAID, which simply don't apply when putting the file system on a USB. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/17/2016 10:45 AM, Andrei Borzenkov wrote:

17.01.2016 17:32, Anton Aylward пишет:

...

Second, the YAST supports the use of multi-volume

If you mean multi-device btrfs, YaST does not support it.

Good! So that's something that Don doesn't have to worry about as being in part of what Yast might deliver. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/16/2016 08:05 PM, don fisher wrote:

On 01/16/2016 05:52 PM, Anton Aylward wrote:

...

On 01/16/2016 06:58 PM, don fisher wrote:

...

Please give me the commands, probably to mkfs.btrfs, that allows me to generate the file system that the distribution media provides. I have tried to use the distribution media, but keep having trouble with a clean build on a USB drive.

Does "mkfs.btrfs" not work for you? Its in /usr/sbin/mkfs.btrfs

I do not know what parameters to give mkfs.btrfs to generate a file system like that the distribution generates. I date back to the days of Richard Stevens where a file was just a set of bytes. I know how to mkfs.ext4 and the rest, but do know know all of the parameters for the btrfs. I was hoping for an example, one that would make the distribution file system. I will try to understand the btrfs at a later time.

I date back, in internet time, to a previous geological era, long before Richard Stephen's books, to UNIX V6, well V5 if you count my time at university, but I wasn't doing sysadmin on that. it wasn't difficult then, its even easier now. Today, the mkfs are SMART! Making BtrFs is not different from any other file system. if you can do ext4FS you can do BtrFS the command you want is probably mkfs.btrfs /dev/sdb1 Personally I wouldn't put a BtrFS on a USB, but that's me. I've only been using BtrFS for a couple of years. The man page on mkfs.btrfs, if you're read it, as Patrick suggested, makes it quite clear what options are available and how they can be used and when they are required, if any. Make sure the device is unmounted. If there is an existing file system on the partition then you'll need "-f", as the man page says. RTFM. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

file system provided by the distribution media. I wish to create a bootable backup on a USB drive, and require THAT file system. That is what I was requesting. I have tried to RTFM and have not found the information that I require, so I will go back to using the distribution media to generate a file system on my USB drive.

Don I guess you missed my post. Looks at the yast logs. If you don't keep

Le 17/01/2016 18:56, don fisher a écrit : them, make some fake install anywhere to have logs, but yast logs are kept a pretty long time in my system That said, I don't see why you should need that for a backup. default BTRFS yast install have snapshots that gives some kind of backing point per se. jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Le 17/01/2016 19:06, don fisher a écrit :

What happens when you are left with an unbootable drive? With all other systems I have used rsync to maintain a mirror of my primary host that I can restore from a bootable media, such as a USB drive.

bootable have nothing to do with btrfs, on the contrary, for example debian grub do not boot btrfs (by default). one must have a bootable device, then mount the backup device and the simpler the file system the better. ext3 is perfect for this (no need of journaling, a backup is seldom written) In fact you have to think at what you want in term of backup. There are on this list archive several very long threads about the sunject (and full books). In summary to backup system (as opposed to data): * if you want instant recovery, use raid * if you have some delay, reinstall the distro (or a new one) before restoring. Crashing bad a system is not that often. * if restoring the very same system is important, look at https://www.howtoforge.com/back_up_restore_harddrives_partitions_with_ghost4... or http://clonezilla.org/ jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/17/2016 01:06 PM, don fisher wrote:

What happens when you are left with an unbootable drive? With all other systems I have used rsync to maintain a mirror of my primary host that I can restore from a bootable media, such as a USB drive.

if you are talking about backup for restoration then that's an entirely different thing, but there is STILL no necessity for BtrFS. Its the files that count! A main drive may be unbootable for a number of reasons. The #1 is simply you have a dead (as in unrecoverable) drive. If you're thinking of a DR scenario then make that clear and treat it as such, which nothing you've written indicates that this is what's going on. many of us here have in-depth knowledge of DR planning and tactics and can advise you. If so, make that clear and ask. What's *!*ESSENTIAL*!* for a recovery is 1. DATA 2. Configuration 3. Customizations What is not essential is 'distribution code'. I've done cost-benefit analysis for a variety of firms on backup/recovery strategies for different scenarios. The ones running traditional mainframes always had the kind of versioning that we now have with snapshots did well when there was a "oops!" class mistake in user files, and when they tested new releases of vendor code and needed to roll-back. In DISASTER scenarios where the disk was lost the snapshot were of no use as they too were on the disk. What mattered was the off-machine backups. One strategy for off machine backup is to backup the complete machine image. Its advantage is that if you destroy the machine or disk you can 'restore everything' to the point of the last backup. Oh, right, there's Schrodinger's Law of Backups. "The condition of any backup is unknown until a backup is attempted". Quite apart from that, such a strategy requires a strict discipline and assumes that changes between, say, daily backups are not critical. That may be true of code updates; yes you can re-run a zypper after restoring yesterday's backup is restored to repeat the changes of today, but DATA is another matter. See #1 above. Oh, and I've also seem a business wiped out by an obsession with keeping complete image backups. If you business requires, say, comparing this months result for a client with the same month last year and the year before, then extracting single files or parts from a backup that is geared to imaging disks is awkward. Backups should follow business strategy. You need to differentiate between backups and archives. Oh, and some people switch around the meaning of those two terms. I've lost bootability many times for a variety of reasons. When its not been a dead disk I've *ALWAYS* been able to recover using the 'repair' option on the distribution CD/DVD. You might note that the DVD uses an ISO file system not a BtrFS. You might also note that many of us backup using rsync to the cloud, where we don't know what file system is being used. Yes, there are going to be issues about the destination file system. It needs to be able to handle pathnames as segment names and file names that are as long as you are using. It needs to be sure that you don't run out of inodes while there's plenty of data space available, which is why I prefer backing up to ReiserFS than ext4FS. But there is nothing that means you need to back up a BtrFS to a BtrFS or that you need a BtrFS to restore it to. If that kind of symmetry was needed we'd never be able to put the distribution on a DVD with an ISOFS or make backups to an DVD. -- A: Yes. > Q: Are you sure? >> A: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. >>> Q: Why is top posting frowned upon? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/19/2016 03:45 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 01/17/2016 07:06 PM, don fisher wrote:

...

What happens when you are left with an unbootable drive? With all other systems I have used rsync to maintain a mirror of my primary host that I can restore from a bootable media, such as a USB drive.

I would not know how to do a barebones full recovery of a system with btrfs on root, except by reinstalling from scratch, then recovering data from the backup.

I doubt that tools such as clonezilla support btrfs fully.

That is exactly what I do, using rsync. My system is a laptop, to I am not concerned about multiple drives. Don -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Le 17/01/2016 23:09, Anton Aylward a écrit :

As JDD says, the Btrfs file system does snapshots. These eat space! I wouldn't want that on a USB!

time change :-) now usb can be usb3, as fast as sata, and usb disk can be as large as 5Tb (I just buy two of them, at a low per terabytes price :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Le 18/01/2016 00:02, Anton Aylward a écrit :

I'm not doubting what you say, but I've just send back some 128G and 512G and 1T USBs 'cos they were .... unreliable. That is,

on usb flash drives, yes. You have to test them with h2testw.exe (windows) or f3write/f3read (linux), because many are fakes, otherds are pretty expensive or very slow one i speak of a rotating plates, sata ones, in usb enclosure, no problem (I have a 4Tb for a year now, no problem -intenso ext4)

But WT*, I've got lots of 16G, which is more than enough to run a LiveUSB with installation capability (if I ever feel perverse and want to check out the laptops at Best Buy )

Yes. an do never forget than openSUSE live usb do open the rest of the usb pen as writable disk, large enough for system backup. I didn't check what file system, but can probably be formatted as ext3 for large files (is any on system) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org