[atomic-wg] Issue #306: support btrfs as a filesystem for ostree based hosts

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe reported a new issue against the project: `atomic-wg` that you are following:
``
Carried from this mailing list discussion:
https://lists.projectatomic.io/projectatomic-archives/atomic-devel/2017-J...

We've had requests from users for btrfs support and we've had several bugs filed
where users were trying to configure a system to use btrfs in the installer and it falling
flat on it's face. The below list can be updated at any time to include a list of bugs
that are releated to atomic ostree/rpm-ostree tech being able to boot on btrfs filesystems
and having the installer support it:

- [BZ#1039124](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1039124) RFE: Allow /boot on
BTRFS, tracker
- [BZ#1415846](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1415846) Atomic install boot
loader fails with btrfs option

Some of these bugs aren't limited to rpm-ostree/ostree, but also to anaconda and
enforced policy within anaconda.

Please add other bugs to this list.  
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Chris Murphy]

chrismurphy added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
> BZ#1039124 RFE: Allow /boot on BTRFS, tracker
>  
Not a show stopper. Advantages of fixing:  better space utilization, reflinks for
kernel/initramfs (dedup), compression.

> BZ#1415846 Atomic install boot loader fails with btrfs option
>  
Is a show stopper. This is
[BZ#1289752](https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1289752) which has some
commentary on what I think is causing confusion. Probably just skip to comment 9 and 10.
Basically GRUB is getting confused about how things are being assembled, and maybe is
related to bind mounts.

The good news is that a converted ext4 to Btrfs installation (to avoid install time
bootloader confusion) does work with OSTree and all the overlayfs stuff. So I think making
this work out of the box might not be much work.

A down the road optimization might be to rethink whether/how to use subvolumes. I'd
rather see the installer not create them, and have OSTree manage them instead.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
From the brand-new RHEL 7.4 [release
notes](https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_L...:

>  ## Btrfs has been deprecated
>  
>  The Btrfs file system has been in Technology Preview state since the
> initial release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6. Red Hat will not be moving Btrfs to a fully
> supported feature and it will be removed in a future major release of Red Hat Enterprise
> Linux.
>  
>  The Btrfs file system did receive numerous updates from the upstream
> in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.4 and will remain available in the Red Hat Enterprise Linux
> 7 series. However, this is the last planned update to this feature.
>  
>  Red Hat will continue to invest in future technologies to address the
> use cases of our customers, specifically those related to snapshots, compression, NVRAM,
> and ease of use. We encourage feedback through your Red Hat representative on features and
> requirements you have for file systems and storage technology.
>  

``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Dusty Mabe]

dustymabe added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``

>  Btrfs has been deprecated
>  
This is for RHEL. I don't really think this affects Fedora other than obvious issues
related to RH employees having less time to work on related issues. Nothing prevents the
community, including RH employees from enabling this, though. 

``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Jason Brooks]

jasonbrooks added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
>  
>  Btrfs has been deprecated
>  
>  This is for RHEL. I don't really think this affects Fedora other than obvious issues
> related to RH employees having less time to work on related issues. Nothing prevents the
> community, including RH employees from enabling this, though.
>  
Yeah, just adding it for reference
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Chris Murphy]

chrismurphy added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
>  Btrfs has been deprecated
>  
RHEL depends on rather old kernels, and they have literally no Btrfs developers in five
years, so it's a huge PITA to be constantly backporting to support something for ~10
years. This dilemma doesn't apply at all to Fedora.

Red Hat as benefactor to and beneficiary of Fedora, puts itself in a better long term
position by encouraging more broad storage knowledge base and usage in Fedora. Fedora
mimicking Red hat is the path to sclerosis, boredom, and irrelevancy.

If anything, Fedora should further encourage Btrfs usage where it makes sense. Aside from
an install time fs choice, there are a number of ways Btrfs could help make for easier,
faster, more stable live images, compose times, and user experience.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Matthew Miller]

mattdm added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
I am a Btrfs skeptic for reasons unrelated to RHEL, but I can buy Chris's argument
here. :)
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Josh Boyer]

jwboyer added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
>  I am a Btrfs skeptic for reasons unrelated to RHEL, but I can buy
> Chris's argument here. :)
>  
I'd go as far as suggesting btrfs shouldn't be the default in any Fedora Edition
or Spin, but I can also see the value in Chris's argument.  I'd doubly support it
if I thought we had a btrfs developer presence that could handle issues, but aside from
Chris and a number of other technically inclined users, I don't think we do. 
Certainly not from a kernel filesystem developer perspective.

There is always hope that group could grow, but at the moment it's only hope.
``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306

[Chris Murphy]

chrismurphy added a new comment to an issue you are following:
``
Adding to the list:
[Include btrfs-progs in ostrees](https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/319)

``

To reply, visit the link below or just reply to this email
https://pagure.io/atomic-wg/issue/306