From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from len.romanrm.net ([176.31.121.172]:55065 "EHLO len.romanrm.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754014Ab3ESL11 (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 May 2013 07:27:27 -0400 Date: Sun, 19 May 2013 17:15:10 +0600 From: Roman Mamedov To: george@chinilu.com Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Virtual Device Support Message-ID: <20130519171510.54897415@natsu> In-Reply-To: <518CFE3A.3080900@chinilu.com> References: <518CFE3A.3080900@chinilu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/LFrvqdp7+rZHiXbRYcxu//X"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --Sig_/LFrvqdp7+rZHiXbRYcxu//X Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 10 May 2013 07:03:38 -0700 George Mitchell wrote: > One the things that is frustrating me the most at this point from a user= =20 > perspective regarding btrfs is the current lack of virtual devices to=20 > describe volumes and subvolumes. =46rom a user perspective btrfs subvolumes have a lot in common with just regular directories aka folders, and nothing in common with (block)devices. "Describing them with virtual devices" does not seem to make a whole lot of sense. --=20 With respect, Roman --Sig_/LFrvqdp7+rZHiXbRYcxu//X Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlGYtD4ACgkQTLKSvz+PZwjHugCfUSfZqUd3A6LE/PE6ZseUQw+r Gl8Anj38YDwvp7DrQqT6H7Rixy3terUe =+8gh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/LFrvqdp7+rZHiXbRYcxu//X--