You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have been helping and supporting users on this Telegram group and this Matrix chat -- handle: @ad_himself -- for a couple of months and I have been struck by how many people were running into issues that can be averted with simple backup methods. In particular, some of these users looked like they could benefit from the backup/rollback features of Btrfs.
Now even though there is already an abundance of material on backing up Pop!_OS using tools and techniques available to ext4, there is little on how to take advantage of these tools -- or their relevant counterparts -- on Btrfs. Thus, before I get working on landing a PR to fix the situation, I'd like to know where you folks stand -- and where system76 stands -- with respect to Btrfs in relation to backing up and rolling back. In particular, is Btrfs something you expect to see used more on Pop!_OS? And do you agree that it would make sense to better support users interested in taking advantage of its backup / rollback features?
If so there would be two aspects of the question in need of better documentation coverage:
How to install Pop! with a Btrfs layout?
How to take advantage of its backup / rollback features?
(1) is pretty much covered in this guide. I think I could get the other author to adapt it to this documentation, but this would presuppose that you / system76 looks favourably at Btrfs as a genuinely / officially supported file-system. This is something I'd like to hear you on.
As for (2) there is of course Timeshift, already discussed in this documentation, but there are alternatives or complement worth mentioning (btrbk, and others). Moreover, documenting these tools require I think some background information about "back up strategies" -- for instance it might not be obvious to new users that they in fact would need to draw a sharp distinction between backing up their file systems and backing up their user files / documents, so that's also a topic to discuss within this broader issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hello there,
I have been helping and supporting users on this Telegram group and this Matrix chat -- handle: @ad_himself -- for a couple of months and I have been struck by how many people were running into issues that can be averted with simple backup methods. In particular, some of these users looked like they could benefit from the backup/rollback features of Btrfs.
Now even though there is already an abundance of material on backing up Pop!_OS using tools and techniques available to ext4, there is little on how to take advantage of these tools -- or their relevant counterparts -- on Btrfs. Thus, before I get working on landing a PR to fix the situation, I'd like to know where you folks stand -- and where system76 stands -- with respect to Btrfs in relation to backing up and rolling back. In particular, is Btrfs something you expect to see used more on Pop!_OS? And do you agree that it would make sense to better support users interested in taking advantage of its backup / rollback features?
If so there would be two aspects of the question in need of better documentation coverage:
(1) is pretty much covered in this guide. I think I could get the other author to adapt it to this documentation, but this would presuppose that you / system76 looks favourably at Btrfs as a genuinely / officially supported file-system. This is something I'd like to hear you on.
As for (2) there is of course Timeshift, already discussed in this documentation, but there are alternatives or complement worth mentioning (btrbk, and others). Moreover, documenting these tools require I think some background information about "back up strategies" -- for instance it might not be obvious to new users that they in fact would need to draw a sharp distinction between backing up their file systems and backing up their user files / documents, so that's also a topic to discuss within this broader issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: