you can use snapper + btrfs and the end result is like `bectl`. However it not as simple/integrated as ZFS Boot environments on FreeBSD

▲

krylon 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

On openSUSE Tumbleweed, it is. Each Upgrade creates two snapshots, one before, one after, and if anything goes wrong, I can boot into a snapshot where the world was still in order.

I have a higher opinion of ZFS than I do of btrfs, but FWIW snapper+btrfs has worked well for me on openSUSE Tumbleweed for ten years now, too.

▲

shrubble 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The btrfs code quality seems less than ZFS, based on the reports I have read.

	▲	krylon 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Last I heard (~8 years ago), the RAID-like functionality in btrfs was very unstable and crash-prone. The impression I got was that there was not a lot of interest in fixing this. Then bcachefs came and ... appears to have gone nowhere AFAICT. The non-RAID part of btrfs appears to be stable. It's the default filesystem on openSUSE and SLES. But I don't think it's ever going to reach feature parity with ZFS.
	▲	sidkshatriya 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		btrfs is suffering from a lot of old bad publicity and some poor design decisions around RAID. But by now it is a great file system if you don't go near RAID5/6. btrfs has its flaws (ZFS has its own flaws!). However: - It's used a lot, especially by facebook and Redhat (on fedora) - Gets a lot of testing - Sees a lot of bug fixes - Has a lot of features I haven't read btrfs code but given that it is a popular file system and Linux code quality tends to be good in popular subsystems I would hesitate to say its code quality is worse than ZFS in any way.