I tried to install Fedora 44 KDE using “Mount point assignments” (dual boot setup + btrfs root partition type) on release day (April 28) on my laptop using the official ISO and received the error:
Installation of the system failed: Storing configuration files and kickstarts org.fedoraproject.Anaconda.Modules.Storage.UnsupportedPartitioningError: Device ‘BTRFS-8c6b619c-5124-4d36-81e2-372b7395bf42’ with mount point ‘/’ not found in devicetree. This indicates a configuration issue.
I instantly reported the bug. The error looks like that:
I thought I had encountered a bug specifically on my laptop machine, but It happened again in virtualbox with just 3 partitions (efi / boot / btrfs root). I tried other ISOs (Workstation/KDE/xfce), no difference, the same error.
And since then there have been no fixes and I’m afraid that I won’t be able to install Fedora using ISO on my laptop for a long time.
I think this is a basic installation scenario with the recommended btrfs root partition type. It seems strange that this was released in this form and was not fixed for so long.
Am I the only one who faced this error and used “Mount point assignments” installation? How long might it take for the Fedora team to fix this bug and release a new ISO?
This is not appropriate.
The btrfs file system is the btrfs volume. You should create a btrfs sub-volume named root that is mounted at / and a second btrfs sub-volume named home that is mounted at /home.
What I am understanding is that you may be attempting to mount the original btrfs volume at / and not creating any sub-volumes.
I am not certain I understand why you are creating specific manually created partitions. It is much simpler and appropriate for most uses to allow the installer to automatically perform the partitioning and setup (which gives 3 partitions (/boot, /boot/efi, and the btrfs volume) – The btrfs volume then contains the 2 sub-volumes named root and home mounted at / and /home respectively.
Create the sub-volumes noted in that btrfs volume if you do this manually.
As I stated, the automatic installation works well even for dual boot. It performs exactly as you desire.
It will use the existing efi partition, and create the ext4 and btrfs partitions in the unallocated space on the drive with the properly defined btrfs sub-volumes for mounting.
The one caveat is that the efi partition is expected to be 600MB in size for a new installation with f44, which also may be a factor in the failure.
The volume is created, The sub-volumes are not and those are necessary for proper functioning.
They have to be created, named, and assigned a mount point.
Think of it as the initial btrfs volume is the device, the sub-volumes are analogous to partitions within that device.
Does it matter if I create only the root (/) subvolume in the btrfs partition without the /home subvolume? When might this be useful? (I usually don’t separate these partitions).
At this time, I will try to install the OS on my laptop again.
It does matter. Having the /home data separate allows a reinstall / repair without wiping out the users home directory data. If you do not create the separate sub-volume then a reinstall / repair is likely to (read that as probably WILL) wipe out all your user data.
With btrfs the space is similar to using only one / partition with ext4 or almost any other file system since the space in the top-level sub-volume is shared with all sub-volumes, but the sub-volumes by name keep the data discrete as if they were actually separate partitions with ext4, etc.
It does not reformat the efi partition when doing an automatic installation and sharing with another OS. It does use (and share) the existing efi partition if there is one. I have done numerous dual boot installations with windows and never seen the installer attempt to reformat an existing efi partition when sharing the space.
You must have already arranged enough unallocated space on the drive for /boot and the main OS (/ and /home) before starting to use this option.
If you did not use the storage editor and were partitioning it manually then I don’t understand how you were able to even attempt to perform the installation since a btrfs partition seems to require a named sub-volume before the file system can be mounted. That name identifies the sub-volume (file system partition equivalent) to be used. (I assume you were attempting to use the “Mount point assignment” option)
You can create multiple top-level sub-volumes, but those apparently are discrete and AFAIK do not share space (but I may be wrong). Multiple sub-volumes under one top-level do share the space within that specific top-level sub-volume.
