dracut/grubby fails to update grub.cfg

[Stefan Huchler]

Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> writes:

>
> Again if you're using modern utilities, you don't have to know any of
> these things, alignment is a solved problem. My point is that Btrfs
> doesn't do anything differently than other filesystems in this regard,
> which is exactly nothing. It all depends on an earlier tool aligning
> the partition on the physical sector boundary.

is fdisk one of this modern utilities?

>
> Rootkit immunity. Chain of trust. Why should only Windows users get these things? 
>

rootkit immunity, I guess thats a technical term that means something,
but it cant mean what it suggest, u cant prevent complelty rootkits by
any technology, only if you make your harddrives complelty readonly or
something.

or it can help you to notice a rootkit or prevent some special kind of
rootkit, but uefi cant make rootkits impossible, sorry but this words
sounds like that.

Its basicly a server only feature, no normal desktop user uses 1000 console
tools to check if there is a rootkit or something, thought redhat and
centos is for servers and fedora primary for desktop.

and another thing servers run under special hardware, so why not have
this stupid server features only availible on this things or use
coreboot or something or support only coreboot.

Trajan immunity, as far as I know this uefi thing is closed source so
its a trojan on its own. Sorry OT but for normal users uefi at best dont
have any possitive effects and no negative most likely it has negative
effekts.


>
> No, it's my mistake I thought you had a UEFI computer for some
> reason. In any case legacy boot isn't a great way to work around
> having UEFI because first it's still a UEFI machine and then you have
> this "compatibility support module" added on as a layer in between
> UEFI and the OS. It can sometimes solve certain problems but it often
> just adds even more complexity.

yes

> Right, so you're depending on the Btrfs 64KB bootloader pad (offset)
> for GRUB core.img to reside on, and thus boot the system. That's fine,
> but this isn't a supported layout by Fedora in that the installer
> won't let you create such a system, so you're kinda on your own at the
> moment.

I get taht this is no blocker bug, but do you ignore all issues that are
no blockers? I installed several gentoos in the past and arch linuxes
and stuff, so I am able to install stuff by my own and can setup the
grub stuff and so on. So now that I am a fedora User I should forget all
that and only use the official installer? Or I get no support?

I could even live with that uefi stuff, if there would be some console
tools taht create automaticly all what is needed. If UEFI would be a
format that every vendor would implement 100% right. But this OEMs or
whatever makes this things cant do their job, so more complexity for
hardware from vendors that make such buggy implementations is a real bad
thing.

If in 20 years in this propriatary bios-operation-systems there is
legacy switch I will still use it.

And dont bring up Android, its pure hell, if possible I dont will buy
any of this things anymore its worse then windows ever was. Having
complety operation systems in the modems and so on that copies all your
data to nsa, no thanx.


> This is sorta beside the point, but my Android phone has 35 partitions
> - not my idea either, that's how it is. I have no idea what most of
> them are used for, yet the phone still works.

yes and thats why it sucks, which Tablet I can install fedora? which
windows pc each windows pc and nearly no android "pc". Yes thanks google
you done great in removing gnu from linux for good.

> Fedora Project, and by support it means an issue we'd block release on
> if it didn't work correctly. You can do what you want by having /boot
> on ext4 and the rest of your OS on / on Btrfs, and grubby will
> properly update grub.cfg without complaints. If you insist on having
> /boot on Btrfs, then right now you either have to use an out of tree
> grubby or you need to manually use grub2-mkconfig -o, etc.

Yes but BTRFS is the future, there will be no ext4 boot partitions in a
few years because everybody only uses btrfs in a few years like
everybody uses ext4 only today (a few special server cases apart) so
good btrfs support shhould be a goal.

BTW I did not even ask for a definite quick patch for fedora, I just
wanted a workaround.

And yes maybe I am a year ahead, to what everybody will do in a year, I
tend to be a bit early adopter somethimes (if its not useless garbage
like uefi), I think when legacy is dead I will only buy hardware that is
patchable by coreboot, or maybe we will see finaly a market of coreboot
preinstalled hardware, then this technology which main focus is to fight
linux aka uefi and secure-anti-linux-boot will go away. I will not buy
it if possbile.