On Mon, 2016-04-25 at 07:00 -0400, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > >> ). I agree that it's probably best to drop the unsafe binary we > >> currently ship; earlier this year I updated the Debian btrfs wiki to > >> warn against using it, because of data-loss level bugs mentioned on > >> the btrfs mailing list. Once the rewrite is complete and people have > >> tested it we can always add it back. > > > > I think it'd be much simpler if inclusion/exclusion of any such tool could > be > > handled through a knob. Just like initramfs-tools does. We can keep the > default > > as whatever the current safe bet is. > > That's a great idea! Sadly, I wasn't able to find what you're > referring to in initramfs-tools. Could you please point me in the > right direction? :-)
I meant btrfs is going to remain unstable for some time. There'll always be mixed results reported. We should allow, for the brave, to easily try if they want to. Something like: rrs@learner:~$ cat /etc/initramfs-tools/hooks/reiserfsprogs #! /bin/bash . /usr/share/initramfs-tools/hook-functions if command -v reiserfsck >/dev/null 2>&1; then copy_exec /sbin/reiserfsck sbin/reiserfsck fi -- Ritesh Raj Sarraf | http://people.debian.org/~rrs Debian - The Universal Operating System
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
