Re: Fedora 33 System-Wide Change proposal: Make btrfs the default file system for desktop variants

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

 




On 7 July 2020 18:31:32 CEST, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 06:02 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:06:05PM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 4:48 PM Gerald Henriksen <ghenriks@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > > So if one has a spare partition to play with btrfs, is there an easy
>> > > way to install a second copy of Fedora without having the /boot/efi/
>> > > entries overwrite the existing Fedora installation?  Or fix it to have
>> > > 2 separate entries after the fact?
>> > 
>> > It's possible but has challenges. Separate ESP's you'll need to either
>> > (a) use the firmware's built-in boot manager to choose what will
>> > probably appear to be identically named Fedora's (b) add new NVRAM
>> > entries, and names, and switch between them before reboot by using
>> > efibootmgr --bootorder or --bootnext.
>> > 
>> > Another option is shared ESP and /boot but my vague recollection is
>> > some things go away. For sure /boot/efi/EFI/fedora is replaced, and
>> > then possibly /boot/loader/entries are replaced. But that might be
>> > easier to deal with than the above, and more efficient.
>> 
>> This is so sad. Boot Loader Specification was explicitly designed to
>> support parallel installations on a single ESP. (The case of different
>> systems was the goal, but the general logic works for different
>> installations of the same system as well.) BLS entries are stored
>> underneath $ESP/<machine-id>, so different Fedora installations which
>> have different machine-id numbers simply don't conflict. sd-boot just
>> displays the combined list. If two entries happen to be *exactly* the
>> same — same os name, same os version, same kernel version — it'll use
>> the machine-id in the entry title to disambiguate them to the user (*).
>> 
>> There is really no reason for this not to work. If are considering
>> separate ESPs and efibootmgr to switch between them then something
>> went rather wrong somewhere.
>
>I can't speak for Chris, but I was honestly just gaming it out in my
>head, trying to think how I'd try it if I was going to do it. I've
>never actually tried it myself.

The easy way to do it is to keep the same ESP and solve it with a nice little GRUB config.
It works well even between distributions.
You can of course break it by having one of the distributions overwrite it wrongly but that's easily fixed and prevented.

M
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux