This has been the advice since day 1. It's obviously not what many want.
I'd expect that someone at Canonical might have a better chance at spurring
communication between GRUB and BTRFS than a mere end-user.
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Lars Stockmann <email address hidden>
wrote:
> Note however the disadvantage of this: if you create a snapshot of your
> btrfs system, the stuff in boot will not be included.
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to a
> duplicate bug report (1152839).
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/736743
>
> Title:
> environment block not implemented on btrfs
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/grub/+bug/736743/+subscriptions
>
This has been the advice since day 1. It's obviously not what many want.
I'd expect that someone at Canonical might have a better chance at spurring
communication between GRUB and BTRFS than a mere end-user.
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 7:25 AM, Lars Stockmann <email address hidden>
wrote:
> Note however the disadvantage of this: if you create a snapshot of your /bugs.launchpad .net/bugs/ 736743 /bugs.launchpad .net/grub/ +bug/736743/ +subscriptions
> btrfs system, the stuff in boot will not be included.
>
> --
> You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to a
> duplicate bug report (1152839).
> https:/
>
> Title:
> environment block not implemented on btrfs
>
> To manage notifications about this bug go to:
> https:/
>