Re: /boot/efi size, 260MiB minimum for FAT32 ESP) -- WAS: /boot size

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Anaconda's current ESP default produces a 200MiB FAT16 volume using
4KiB clusters. The Windows 8 and 10 (enterprise) installers use this
without complaint. It's Advanced Format 4kn compatible. I see neither
an advantage or disadvantage to the change in terms of compatibility.
If blivet folks want to make non-removable drive ESPs 260MiB so that
they can be formatted FAT32 with a 4KiB cluster by mkdosfs, that's

Asking the user about any of this is not reasonable. All of your
suggestions have confused me, so there's no way I'd agree to
subjecting all anaconda users who have an empty drive and user manual
storage configuration to this. I've been wanting to get rid of
bootloader UI from custom storage config for years, not make it worse
by adding more unnecessary UI options for the user to have to sift
through to get a Fedora installation.

About the MSR specifically:

a. Microsoft says the MSR must go immediately before the basic data
partition, and your proposal doesn't do that nor can it. [1]
b. The Microsoft (Windows 10 Enterprise) installer creates an MSR
immediately before the basic data partition, when installed into
unallocated space. [2]

On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 1:31 PM, Bryan Smith <b.j.smith@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> It's convincing that the ESP needs to use 4KiB clusters to support 4kn
>> drives. But I'm unconvinced any UEFI spec mandates that the ESP needs
>> to be FAT32.
> So ... why not give the user the option of FAT32 without confusing them?

Because giving them the option confuses them.

>> It's suggested that this ought to be true but the
>> language I've seen so far doesn't say it must be true.
> And I'm trying to get you to understand that this is a very, very
> valid option for people who _wipe_ their disks and create a _new_ GPT
> disk label.  Something we can do in Anaconda.

I just did it in Anaconda and followed it up with a Windows 10
installation and I'm not experiencing the problem you suggest needs a
solution. So at the moment I think you're confused.

> P.S.  Please, please understand that I'm just trying to avoid a lot of
> issues that many people run into, with a simple checkbox when someone
> installs Linux on a new or wiped disk (not an existing one).

A lot of issues that people run into? This is the first time I've ever
heard of this issue and when I tried to reproduce the problem, I

"It is particularly important that the MSR be created before other
primary data partitions."


Chris Murphy

Anaconda-devel-list mailing list

[Index of Archives]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Legacy List]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]
  Powered by Linux