Re: booting btrfs

[Andrey Borzenkov <arvidjaar@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1466 bytes --]

В Mon, 14 Oct 2013 22:50:10 +0200
Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> пишет:

> On 14.10.2013 22:45, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > 
> > On Oct 14, 2013, at 1:29 PM, Vladimir 'φ-coder/phcoder' Serbinenko <phcoder@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >>> So it seems that GRUB is using relative pathnames to the default subvolume.
> >> This is not intentional. When this part of code was written there was no
> >> set-default available at all so this couldn't be tested and I simply
> >> followed the specification. It told to take root_tree and
> >> root_dir_objectid from superblock then go to "default" directory. What
> >> of this needs to be changed? Just remove "default" and make it part of
> >> path? We would need to change grub-mkrelpath to match runtime behaviour.
> >> Is there a way to detect that mountinfo gives garbage and somehow get
> >> where the real root points?
> > 
> > Here's the response. It seems similar but not identical to what you described above.
> > 
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org/msg27955.html
> > 
> I don't see what is the difference between that and what GRUB currently
> does. Will look tomorrow morning.


I have a feeling that there was some misunderstanding about the
problem. Or btrfs developers do not really intend to have multiple
"active filesystems" at the same time and see "set-default" as the only
legal way to switch between filesystem instances.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]