Re: Tux3 Report: Initial fsck has landed

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On 03/19/2013 06:00:32 PM, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 29. Januar 2013 schrieb Daniel Phillips:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>  
> wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 04:20:11PM -0800, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:27:38PM -0800, David Lang wrote:
> > >> > The situation I'm thinking of is when dealing with VMs, you  
> make a
> > >> > filesystem image once and clone it multiple times. Won't that  
> end up
> > >> > with the same UUID in the superblock?
> > >>
> > >> Yes, but one ought to be able to change the UUID a la tune2fs
> > >> -U.  Even still... so long as the VM images have a different UUID
> > >> than the fs that they live on, it ought to be fine.
> > >
> > > ... and this is something most system administrators should be
> > > familiar with.  For example, it's one of those things that Norton
> > > Ghost when makes file system image copes (the equivalent of  
> "tune2fs
> > > -U random /dev/XXX")
> >
> > Hmm, maybe I missed something but it does not seem like a good idea
> > to use the volume UID itself to generate unique-per-volume metadata
> > hashes, if users expect to be able to change it. All the metadata  
> hashes
> > would need to be changed.
> 
> I believe that is what BTRFS is doing.
> 
> And yes, AFAIK there is no easy way to change the UUID of a BTRFS  
> filesystems
> after it was created.

I'm confused, http://tux3.org/ lists a bunch of dates from 5 years ago,  
then nothing. Is this project dead or not?

Rob