I mean, a number of distributions are defaulting to BtrFS. The exception is, Ubuntu. Because for some reason, Ubuntu wants to suggest and push ZFS, but only on their main edition, Ubuntu actual. Every other spin doesn't offer ZFS but instead lets you install using BtrFS. Even Ubuntu Server edition lets you use BtrFS.
Fedora defaults to BtrFS.
OpenSUSE defaults to BtrFS.
EndeavourOS, can use BtrFS, though not sure if it's necessarily
default or not. Debian lets you install with BtrFS, in both
standard install and Live install (Calamares based).
Anyway, all that asside, I've been using BtrFS a good part of 10~15 years now, and with great success mind you. I use it extensively including bootable snapshots, use of snapper, and I've done so with distros like Ubuntu (manually), Linux Mint (Post install script modifications), LMDE (same with scripting), Debian (Manual during install), Fedora, and EndeavourOS (Even better setup with customized installation as per their user_commands.bash approach).
Eric
I just (finally) looked up the features of Btrfs, and it sounds fantastic. Possibly ZFS-adjacent but without the nightmarish license problems? Am I missing something? It's in the kernel, but if it was that good, lots of distros would be defaulting to it ... and they're not. A couple have tried, but it hasn't taken off. Can someone fill me in with the details I'm missing?
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk