Hello,
Should Fedora 33 on ARM use BTRFS by default?
I downloaded Fedora-Minimal-armhfp-33-1.2-sda.raw.xz image and installed it to my Odroid XU4. Checking output from mount -l shows / mounted as EXT4. I thought Fedora 33 was meant to use BTRFS by default.
Michael Whapples
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 3:45 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Hello,
Should Fedora 33 on ARM use BTRFS by default?
I downloaded Fedora-Minimal-armhfp-33-1.2-sda.raw.xz image and installed it to my Odroid XU4. Checking output from mount -l shows / mounted as EXT4. I thought Fedora 33 was meant to use BTRFS by default.
Fedora Minimal and Fedora Server do not. All the other variants do.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 08:45:28PM +0000, Michael Whapples wrote:
I downloaded Fedora-Minimal-armhfp-33-1.2-sda.raw.xz image and installed it to my Odroid XU4. Checking output from mount -l shows / mounted as EXT4. I thought Fedora 33 was meant to use BTRFS by default.
The desktop images should, but not necessarily other outputs.
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
Regards
Michael Whapples
On 14/11/2020 20:49, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 08:45:28PM +0000, Michael Whapples wrote:
I downloaded Fedora-Minimal-armhfp-33-1.2-sda.raw.xz image and installed it to my Odroid XU4. Checking output from mount -l shows / mounted as EXT4. I thought Fedora 33 was meant to use BTRFS by default.
The desktop images should, but not necessarily other outputs.
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 4:43 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
Unfortunately, that would be very hard. If it was desired, *maybe* we could produce alternate Btrfs-based versions for the non-desktop variants...
I have looked through the source of the arm-image-installer and now understand exactly what it is doing and yes I see how it really is not suited to setting the FS, the image determines that.
BTRFS versions of the minimal images would be nice but I guess not essential as I have managed until now without BTRFS on my ARM devices.
If doing BTRFS images for none-desktop images, then minimal is probably enough as one can build up whatever they want from that.
Regards
Michael Whapples
On 14/11/2020 21:44, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 4:43 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
Unfortunately, that would be very hard. If it was desired, *maybe* we could produce alternate Btrfs-based versions for the non-desktop variants...
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:22 AM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
I have looked through the source of the arm-image-installer and now understand exactly what it is doing and yes I see how it really is not suited to setting the FS, the image determines that.
BTRFS versions of the minimal images would be nice but I guess not essential as I have managed until now without BTRFS on my ARM devices.
Well having two minimal images requires twice the QA resources and I've had explicit requests for something to remain ext4 as it's more widely available and known at this time and it eases testing for some users/usecases as it's well known/tested.
You can use anaconda to install your own custom image for whatever you like as well.
If doing BTRFS images for none-desktop images, then minimal is probably enough as one can build up whatever they want from that.
Regards
Michael Whapples
On 14/11/2020 21:44, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 4:43 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
Unfortunately, that would be very hard. If it was desired, *maybe* we could produce alternate Btrfs-based versions for the non-desktop variants...
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
Yes I understand the additional effort it might take.
Looks like using anaconda to install a custom image may be what I need to look into. Creating the custom image and such like is new to me, I will try and find the appropriate docs but a pointer to get me started in the docs may be useful.
Regards
Michael Whapples
On 18/11/2020 08:30, Peter Robinson wrote:
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 8:22 AM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
I have looked through the source of the arm-image-installer and now understand exactly what it is doing and yes I see how it really is not suited to setting the FS, the image determines that.
BTRFS versions of the minimal images would be nice but I guess not essential as I have managed until now without BTRFS on my ARM devices.
Well having two minimal images requires twice the QA resources and I've had explicit requests for something to remain ext4 as it's more widely available and known at this time and it eases testing for some users/usecases as it's well known/tested.
You can use anaconda to install your own custom image for whatever you like as well.
If doing BTRFS images for none-desktop images, then minimal is probably enough as one can build up whatever they want from that.
Regards
Michael Whapples
On 14/11/2020 21:44, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 4:43 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
Unfortunately, that would be very hard. If it was desired, *maybe* we could produce alternate Btrfs-based versions for the non-desktop variants...
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
arm mailing list -- arm@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to arm-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/arm@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, Nov 14, 2020 at 9:43 PM Michael Whapples contact@ashotinthedark.online wrote:
Neal and Matthew thanks for clarifying that. Yes the various announcements do say desktop editions, the significance of that must have just passed me by.
would be nice if the ARM image installer would allow selecting the FS when writing the image. Not sure how much work that would be to support.
That's not what the image installer does, it takes a precreated image and writes in to disk then sets up the firmware, it doesn't create filesystems so converting them is out of scope of the intention of the application.
-
Matthew Miller -
Michael Whapples -
Neal Gompa -
Peter Robinson