<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2012/2/20 Adam Williamson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:awilliam@redhat.com">awilliam@redhat.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On Sat, 2012-02-18 at 17:16 +0200, cornel panceac wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> 2012/2/18 Adam Williamson <<a href="mailto:awilliam@redhat.com">awilliam@redhat.com</a>><br>
> Hey, folks. Here's another Alpha status report, focusing on<br>
> open<br>
> blocker/NTH issues and updates that need karma.<br>
><br>
> As always,<br>
> <a href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers" target="_blank">https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Current_Release_Blockers</a> lists<br>
> open blockers more or less in real time.<br>
><br>
> Here's a quick summary of requested actions for the impatient:<br>
><br>
> no btrfs?<br>
<br>
</div></div>Not sure what you mean, but btrfs bugs don't block Alpha so long as it's<br>
not the default FS (which it still isn't). btrfs issues are Final<br>
blockers in general (per criterion "The installer must be able to create<br>
and install to any workable partition layout using any file system<br>
offered in a default installer configuration, LVM, software, hardware or<br>
BIOS RAID, or combination of the above").<br></blockquote></div><br>i see, thank you very much. i was wondering about this:<br><a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787341">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=787341</a><br>
<br>