Hello, when creating a BTRFS partition for /, the installer names the root subvolume as @rootfs.

The name @ has been popularized by many other distributions for /, and as become sort of a standard. Several tools expect this nomenclature, such as Timeshift and others.

While easy to change during installation, it may cause issues for more inexperienced users not familiar with the details, causing issues post installation.

I ask you to consider this change.

Hello João,

João <joao@jguerra.dev> writes:

Would you please share the list of tools that expect this?


Regards,
Nicholas

Hello João,

João <joao@jguerra.dev> writes:

Would you please share the list of tools that expect this?


Regards,
Nicholas

Hello, let me just say that there are many tools, and I don't know most.

I'd say that the two most popular tools are Timeshift and Snapper. Timeshift is strict with the layout (requires @, @home, etc.). Snapper is configurable and doesn't really care. Several other tools are built on top of Snapper. apt-btrfs-snapshot is also strict with the layout.

Hello João!

João <joao@jguerra.dev> writes:

Is apt-btrfs-snapshot in Debian?  Last I checked (years ago) it was an
abandoned Ubuntu package.

For many years Timeshift's upstream very clearly defined their scope as
"we exclusively support btrfs on Ubuntu, and some Ubuntu derivatives".
Has this changed?  Do they officially support Fedora and its rational
and sensible layout?

Meanwhile Ubuntu doesn't allow configurable subvolumes.  Debian's motto
is "The Universal Operating System", and when we fix problems, we do our
best to fix them for everybody outside of Debian.  So, for example, when
a piece of software hard-codes an Ubuntu limitation, we see that as
technical debt, and not a standard.  Our policies must not infringe on
the freedoms of Fedora, or Arch users, because our social contract is an
ethos and not just a legalism.

https://www.debian.org/social_contract

Cheers,
Nicholas

Hello, replying to your questions below.

It works out-of-the-box (meaning there's a package in the distro's main repository) in all the distros you mentioned and some more (Arch, Fedora, openSUSE, etc.).

Fedora's default layout on BTRFS includes what I was asking for. If we consider it to be a rational and sensible layout does it mean we are open to the change?

Honestly, I would propose more subvolumes out of the box (e.g. for home and var), but I consider this a first step. This is also a relatively small and simpler change vs further configuration. I personally think that offering a layout similar to what the other distros offer is more helpful for users.

Hello, we can close this report. I'll keep my workarounds.