On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 03:04:30PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2014-02-25 at 15:53 -0700, Chris Murphy wrote:
> adding desktop@ since they are also looking at file system options
>
> On Feb 25, 2014, at 1:42 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>
> >> === File system ===
> >>
> >> The default file system type for workstation installs should be
> >> btrfs.
> >
> > The default file system is definitely up for some debate, but I'd make
> > an argument for using XFS atop LVM[1] for the default filesystem in
> > the Fedora Server, at least in part because Red Hat's storage experts
> > have done the research for us already and determined that XFS is the
> > recommended fit for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.
>
> XFS is a really good idea for Server.
>
> Follow-up questions:
>
> - Can Server and Workstation WG's choose different defaults for their
> product's installers?
Given my understanding of anaconda's architecture I don't believe this
would *technically* present a significant problem. anaconda already has
the concept of being used to install different products, and using
different defaults for various things depending on what product it's
being used to install: this is how RHEL can have different defaults from
Fedora.a
If the Server and Workstation trees are separate composes, you can have a
different default filesystem.
It would be best to ask the anaconda devs, though. Maybe they think
it's
a horrible hack and don't want to extend it any further than their
paychecks require. CCing bcl and dcantrell.
It's not as horrible of a hack as it was in the past.
In terms of *policy*, it'd be up to FESCo, I guess. It seems like
a
perfectly reasonable point of variance between products to me.
I say the default Fedora filesystem should be up for vote, much like FESCo
members or the code name for a release.
Thanks,
--
David Cantrell <dcantrell(a)redhat.com>
Manager, Installer Engineering Team
Red Hat, Inc. | Westford, MA | EST5EDT