On Mi, 21.12.22 06:27, Neal Gompa (ngompa13(a)gmail.com) wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 6:23 AM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel
<devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/12/2022 19:56, Chris Murphy wrote:
> > Great. The gotcha though is this in effect requires a change in the file system
currently mounted at /boot, which is ext4. And ext4 isn't supported by sd-boot or UEFI
firmware. So if you're going to support sd-boot, the installer needs to be aware that
either the ESP is big enough to be used as /boot, or if it's not big enough then it
will be mounted on /efi*and* a new partition XBOOTLDR formatted as FAT will be used as
/boot.
>
> Nobody should use FAT for /boot. efifs[1] should be used instead.
>
> systemd-boot can load these drivers from ESP out of the box[2].
>
> [1]:
https://github.com/pbatard/efifs
> [2]:
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/15617
Indeed. We should not endeavor to create more problems by putting more
stuff in the ESP. By doing so, we lose features and capabilities from
our own native filesystem. No matter what boot manager we use, we
should not be required to give that up. We already have efifs[1]
packaged in Fedora, let's use that.
That's such a weird logic. /boot is supposed to contain data consumed
by the boot loader, not so much by the OS.
What do you think a boot laoder is going to do with access modes, file
ownership, selinux labels?
I am pretty sure we should reduce problems and simplify things by just
using VFAT for boot loader stuff, and put everything at the least
number of places possible.
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering, Berlin