default file system, was: Comparison to Workstation Technical Specification

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Dennis Gilmore <dennis at ausil.us> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:01:47 -0500
> Matthew Miller <mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 07:43:53AM -0500, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> > I realize that XFS is a difficult pill to swallow for /boot, due to
>> > your use of syslinux instead of GRUB2. If the Server and Workstation
>> > groups decide to settle on both using XFS-on-LVM for the main
>> > partitions, we could *probably* also compromise on using ext4 for
>> > just /boot.
>>
>> Right now, the cloud images are unpartitioned. In some cloud providers
>> (e.g., the 800lb gorilla of Amazon EC2) we in fact use the kernel that
>> assumes the image is just one partition, not a disk image. We could
>> change that (and I kind of want to anyway, for consistency), but it
>> would be... change. Having a separate /boot is also problematic
>> (read: wasteful) for ultra-small images, and adds complexity a lot of
>> users are going to frown at. So..... if by "/boot" you mean "the
>> partition that /boot happens to be on, even if it is /", then I think
>> we're good. Otherwise we will have to figure something else out.
>
> u-boot has zero support for xfs so arm systems will have to use ext4
> for /boot at least as well. which would mean / if users chose to not
> use a separate /boot partition

Or, as an alternative, XFS support could be added to u-boot and/or
syslinux.  Never eliminate the possibility of actually writing code to
fix problems.  All it takes is someone willing to do work ;).

josh