Re: Btrfs hangs 3.19-10

[Hugo Mills <hugo@carfax.org.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1705 bytes --]

On Sat, Apr 04, 2015 at 12:55:08PM +0000, Russell Coker wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 05:14:12 AM Duncan wrote:
> > Well, btrfs itself isn't really stable yet...  Stable series should be 
> > stable at least to the extent that whatever you're using in them is, but 
> > with btrfs itself not yet entirely stable... 
> 
> Also for stable operation you want both forward and backward compatability.  
> You could make an Ext3 filesystem and expect that any random ancient Linux box 
> you are likely to encounter can read it.  Even Ext4 has been supported for a 
> long time and most systems you are likely to encounter won't have any problems 
> with it.
> 
> I recently made a BTRFS filesystem on a Debian/Jessie system (kernel 3.16.7) 
> with default options and discovered that Debian/Wheezy (kernel 3.2.65) can't 
> read it.  I think that one criteria for "stable" in a filesystem is that 
> kernels from a couple of previous releases can mount it.  By that criteria 
> BTRFS won't be "stable" for use in Debian for about 4 years.
> 
> As an aside are there options to mkfs.btrfs that would make a filesystem 
> mountable by kernel 3.2.65?  If so I'll file a Debian/Jessie bug report 
> requesting that a specific mention be added to the man page.

   Yes, there are. It's probably -O^extref, but if you can show the
dmesg output from the 3.2 kernel on the failed mount (so that it shows
what the actual failure was), we should be able to give you a more
precise answer.

   Hugo.

-- 
Hugo Mills             | Welcome to Hollywood, a land just off the coast of
hugo@... carfax.org.uk | Planet Earth
http://carfax.org.uk/  |
PGP: 65E74AC0          |                                        The Cat's Meow

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]