On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 10:07 -0700, Andrew Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 12:32 -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: > > > >> Adam's scheme is the only possibility. > > > >> Adam's raid1 /boot just seems more > >> reliable, especially if it became a designed feature. > > > > It's not my plan, it's the anaconda developers'. I only described it. > > Actually it took them like 15 minutes to get it into my dumb brain. :) > > Can you all please try to make sure you're talking about the same thing? > I believe that Chris is suggesting /boot as raid1 and ESP not mounted. He is also giving feedback on the ESP-as-RAID1 idea. He's both doing that *and* proposing an alternative, which may be what you're missing. I don't think anyone but you is confused about the alternative ideas here. > Adam and Przemek seem to be talking about /boot on RAID1 (I've never > heard anyone say that /boot as RAID is a bad idea) but I think > something's very confused about my understanding of your opinions > about how the ESP should or does work. Can one or both of you please > describe, unambiguously, how you think the ESP should be created, when > and if it should be mounted, what filesystem and/or raid config should > be used to mount it, and what should happen when a kernel is updated? I thought I already did. Just go back and read my original mail again. And again, it's nothing about what "I think", I was simply describing a potential design which had been explained to me by someone else. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
