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?

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    2·
    3 months ago

    I wrote snapshot hooks for Arch that fire before installing or upgrading packages and I have a simple shell alias that I can use to fire off a manual snapshot any time I need one. If a package breaks in an inconvenient way and can’t just be dowgraded back to function or I have some other time pressure I can just point my root partition at a clone of my most recent snapshot and reboot to roll back. I don’t usually bother rebooting into a cloned snapshot to test changes as I can just perform the same steps to roll back and the automated rolling snapshots mean I don’t need to baby anything to have the same protection.