I use Btrfs with Parabola GNU/Linux-libre, a derivative distribution of Arch Linux. I use no snapshot management tools such as Snapper or Timeshift. I keep my system minimal and tidy. Everything is boring and predictable. I do not bork my system by mistake, except when something breaks after an odd update, usually once or twice per year. When it happens, I find a workaround (usually something needs to be downgraded) and file a bug report if there is none.

When I need to tinker with something that can possibly go out of control, like installing a new package for a program that I want to try out and I am not sure I will want to keep it, I take a snapshot of my current "pristine" system and boot into it. In the snapshot copy of my system I do all the dirty stuff I want to try out. When I am satisfied with my findings, I reboot into the main subvolume and delete the snapshot.

It seems to me that most people use Btrfs snapshots preemptively in case of unexpected failure. I use snapshots exactly when I know I am going to do something that can lead to instability or «OS rot». Am I the only one using Btrfs snapshots like this?

  • henfredemars@infosec.pub
    ·
    4 months ago

    You’re not alone. I do use snapshots for failure protection but I also use it when I know I’m likely to induce a failure by running an experiment.

    It’s also just as valid to not use the snapshot feature at all. Perhaps you value data integrity, for example, through the use of full checksums enabled by the design.

    Your system and the software it runs belongs to you and is in your service.