On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 2:58 PM, Tom Hughes <tom@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 15/06/18 22:50, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "KM" == Kyle Marek <psppsn96@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> >> KM> I can't remember what else I discovered in reading the manual >> KM> last. Do you know if there are any other discovery/identification >> KM> limitations to the old superblocks? >> >> I don't think there are any in the context of having a small RAID1 ESP >> across not too many devices. The 0.9 format which anaconda uses is >> limited to 28 devices (and 4TB, but that's obviously not a problem). I >> don't really see why it couldn't use the 1.0 format, really. There is >> no difference between the 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 formats besides the location >> on the disk. > > > I have a machine that has a raid1 md for the ESP using 1.0 metadata > and it's never caused any problems. > > I didn't realise the installer did it automatically now though - that > machine was setup when the installer wouldn't even let you do it > manually so I had to set it up as raid post install. > I wouldn't be surprised if using a capsule-on-disk did terrible terrible things if ESP were on invisible RAID 1 (a la mdadm 0.9 or 1.0). _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/26GYAT63UYYLD6HI2EG75G2ES5AP4NN2/
