btrfs to be standard fs for Fedora 16?

[Joel Rees]

On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Mikkel L. Ellertson
<mellertson at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 06/10/2011 11:27 AM, Tim wrote:
>> Tim:
>>>> Is there one for LVM, yet?  Because I don't recall lack of error
>>>> correction programs preventing LVM being inflicted upon us.
>>
>> Mikkel L. Ellertson:
>>> LVM is not a file system. It is more on the line of a partitioning
>>> setup. You check the individual file systems contained in the LVM
>>> partitions, not the partition. Part of this is that the LVM
>>> partition may span more then one drive.
>>
>> Let me put it this way, then:  If you try to boot a system, and the
>> filesystem within the LVM is stuffed, are you going to be able to do a
>> rudimentary boot (ala runlevel 1) and fsck it to sort it out?
>>
>> On a completely non LVM installation, if there was enough of the
>> filesystem around, you could do that.  I don't recall that it was
>> possible if your system used LVM.
>>
> Nope. It is equivalent to trying to boot a system with a hosed
> partition table. You have to get out a rescue disk that understands
> LVM. I believe you can use the install medium in the rescue mode to
> do it, but I have never had to do it. I have only one system using
> LVM, and I have not broken it yet. (Knock on wood)

For what it's worth, I've hosed my LVM more than once and fairly
quickly found the information I needed to read the backup tables or
manually point to the volumes.

It was a little scary the first time, and not something I want to do
every day, and things have improved since then.

I use LVM for two reasons, the primary one being that the DOS
partitioning scheme is so broken that it's hard to maintain two
Fedoras and a Debian (plus/minus a bsd or two) without using LVM.

I have other reasons not to be enthusiastic about this particular
news, specifically, neither grub nor grub2 working for me.

Joel Rees