On 4 September 2017 at 20:03, Scott Sullivan via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 03/09/17 02:12 PM, William Park via talk wrote:
On Sun, Sep 03, 2017 at 05:52:12PM +0000, Dhaval Giani wrote:
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 1:41 PM William Park via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Now, I read (it's an old news, though) that BTRFS is being "deprecated" by Redhat, and presumably others will follow.
Where have you read this news? As far as I know btrfs is actively being developed and no one is stopping development.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/08/16/red_hat_banishes_btrfs_from_rhel/
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/htm...
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Red-Hat-Deprecates-Btrfs-Again
This really should be read as 'if you call us to exercise your support contract, this piece isn't covered'.
You'll get the same response for openldap(*), as they want you to use their IDM product. It doesn't make openldap any less in quality or utility.
* Based on recent real-world experience. -- Scott Sullivan
Some years ago (I'd guess 2005-ish, so it has been a while), I recall Red Hat support declining to respond to issues relating to OpenSSL because we had (I forget the exact term) 'unsupported software' in that we were using the JFS kernel modules and RPM packages that, despite being included, were apparently "not supported." They were fairly keen not to respond to *anything* because we had JFS (that they chose to include, but not support). That seemed really weaselly to me at the time. It would be one thing had we had a custom compiled kernel with our own wacky stuff, but everything *was* stock; the JFS builds were *provided by Red Hat*. Ever since, I have not been highly enthralled by the merits of "Red Hat support." It *is* troublesome to me that many people (and I have seen that mentioned on this thread) consider "supported by Red Hat" to be somehow essential to "usable on Linux." It puts Red Hat on a pedestal which is harmful in multiple ways. - It gives them power that they shouldn't have; - It enacts "facts" like those that were the point of the original question... Is BTRFS any good? Should you use it? Or is it needful to migrate to something else? The answers that seem to arrive have the shape "Well, RHAT doesn't want to support it, so everyone should consider it obsolete and unsupportable." - I seem to recall RHAT developing ext4; unless things have further changed, that ought to mean that the only thing they are keen to support is ext4. XFS, NILFS2, BTRFS, JFS, everything else, need not apply. That's all pretty harmful to my mind. -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"