Using btrfsctl from ubuntu maverick, (built and running on ubuntu-10.04), I get: rich@eisenhower> btrfsctl -s snap1 /home || echo failed operation complete Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 failed rich@eisenhower> ls -las snap1 total 4 4 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 32 2010-07-20 18:25 . 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1324 2010-07-21 12:47 .. 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 checker build 22 2010-07-20 18:21 checker 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1322 2010-07-21 12:44 rich 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 36 2010-07-21 10:47 za-cb This would seem to indicate a non-zero exit status despite the fact that the snapshotting operation appears to have succeeded. This makes it impossible to programmatically check whether a snapshot was created successfully or not as I will need to explicitly discard the exit status from btrfsctl. I get the same results when built from git, except that it identifies itself as "v0.19-16-g075587c". I would expect that btrfsctl would return zero exit status when it was capable of doing what it was asked and non-zero exit status only when it could not. --rich -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Try using "btrfs" tool; btrfsctl is/will be deprecated I think... and it''s better anyway. C Anthony [mobile] On Jul 23, 2010, at 3:04 PM, "K. Richard Pixley" <rich@noir.com> wrote:> Using btrfsctl from ubuntu maverick, (built and running on > ubuntu-10.04), I get: > > rich@eisenhower> btrfsctl -s snap1 /home || echo failed > operation complete > Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 > failed > rich@eisenhower> ls -las snap1 > total 4 > 4 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 32 2010-07-20 18:25 . > 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1324 2010-07-21 12:47 .. > 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 checker build 22 2010-07-20 18:21 checker > 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1322 2010-07-21 12:44 rich > 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 36 2010-07-21 10:47 za-cb > > This would seem to indicate a non-zero exit status despite the fact > that the snapshotting operation appears to have succeeded. This > makes it impossible to programmatically check whether a snapshot was > created successfully or not as I will need to explicitly discard the > exit status from btrfsctl. > > I get the same results when built from git, except that it > identifies itself as "v0.19-16-g075587c". > > I would expect that btrfsctl would return zero exit status when it > was capable of doing what it was asked and non-zero exit status only > when it could not. > > --rich > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux- > btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Ah! Thanks. Wiki page needs to be updated then. It shows btrfsctl and doesn''t mention btrfs. This one: https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Getting_started --rich On 20100723 13:06, C Anthony Risinger wrote:> Try using "btrfs" tool; btrfsctl is/will be deprecated I think... and > it''s better anyway. > > C Anthony [mobile] > > On Jul 23, 2010, at 3:04 PM, "K. Richard Pixley"<rich@noir.com> wrote: > >> Using btrfsctl from ubuntu maverick, (built and running on >> ubuntu-10.04), I get: >> >> rich@eisenhower> btrfsctl -s snap1 /home || echo failed >> operation complete >> Btrfs Btrfs v0.19 >> failed >> rich@eisenhower> ls -las snap1 >> total 4 >> 4 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 32 2010-07-20 18:25 . >> 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1324 2010-07-21 12:47 .. >> 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 checker build 22 2010-07-20 18:21 checker >> 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 rich rich 1322 2010-07-21 12:44 rich >> 0 drwxr-xr-x 1 root root 36 2010-07-21 10:47 za-cb >> >> This would seem to indicate a non-zero exit status despite the fact >> that the snapshotting operation appears to have succeeded. This >> makes it impossible to programmatically check whether a snapshot was >> created successfully or not as I will need to explicitly discard the >> exit status from btrfsctl. >> >> I get the same results when built from git, except that it >> identifies itself as "v0.19-16-g075587c". >> >> I would expect that btrfsctl would return zero exit status when it >> was capable of doing what it was asked and non-zero exit status only >> when it could not. >> >> --rich >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux- >> btrfs" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html-- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html