Am 16.01.2014 22:15 schrieb "Chris Murphy" <<a href="mailto:lists@colorremedies.com">lists@colorremedies.com</a>>: > > > On Jan 16, 2014, at 1:58 PM, Kai Krakow <<a href="mailto:hurikhan77@gmail.com">hurikhan77@gmail.com</a>> wrote: > > > Chris Murphy <<a href="mailto:lists@colorremedies.com">lists@colorremedies.com</a>> schrieb: > > > >> Due to anti-magic, a recent update horribly broke the system's ability to > >> do further updates. This is resolved by regression to a prior Btrfs > >> snapshot, once updated it works fine. But that's a two week old snapshot. > >> I don't need the broken rootfs but I want to keep the journal for those > >> two weeks. > >> > >> Is this a reasonable want or need and if so how to merge the logs? Between > >> the two snapshots there are several like named files in > >> /var/log/journal/<machine-id>. > > > > I'd recommend to place /var/log/journal on a subvolume so it is not affected > > by snapshotting. You can do separate snapshots for it (tho I cannot imagine > > why you would want to do it). That way you get a snapshot "protection" for > > these files, too, and you are free to roll back the rest of the system > > without affecting this subvolume. > > Aha, good idea. So then I mount the subvol at /var/log/journal? Is there any risk of journald writing to rootfs /var/log/journal before the subvolume is mounted? Or is the flush to persistent storage sufficiently delayed as to not be a concern? > > Chris Murphy > Afair, you don't need to mount subvolumes. Mirco