On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Oliver Ries <oliver.ries@canonical.com> wrote:
> Are we providing any type of migration path for users that are running
> reiserfs? Was reiserfs ever the default in Ubuntu, iow is there potentially
> a userbase that through upgrades is still stuck on that fs?
I'm pretty sure we've never defaulted to reiserfs; I think the
question is "How many users chose a non-default filesystem." And out
of those, who is choosing reiserfs?
I can't think of a single use case or user who needs ReiserFS in the
installer in 2013. My anectdotal evidence points to people who don't
care about filesystems (aka. ext4), or people who care about next
generation filesystems, which basically comes down to ZFS and btrfs,
one which has plenty of 3rd party support, and the other has been
supported in the kernel and installer for quite some time.
From looking at the kernel configs we can support volumes for users
that have reiserfs partitions, the proposal is to remove the support
in the installer. However for the sake of due diligence I don't
suppose errors.ubuntu.com or any of the sort of automated QA things
we've been working on happen to have metrics on filesystems?
--
Jorge Castro
Canonical Ltd.
http://juju.ubuntu.com/charm-championship - Share your infrastructure,
win a prize!
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
