On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 4:48 AM Michel Alexandre Salim <michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: [snip] > > As discussed in detail here: > > https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/206 > > we really should be moving away from that. As discussed there Suse > > already has grub-patches to instead store the grubenv in an part of > > the btrfs filesystem header which is reserved for bootloader use. > > > That's one of the option discussed, yes. One issue with doing it this > way is we'll have to reimplement it for XFS and other future > filesystems. > Yes, I don't think is worth it to cherry-pick Suse's patch only for btrfs and instead should aim for a general solution. > > As @javierm says in the linked fedora-workstation issue, that is > > also the long term plan for Fedora, but we really want to discuss > > and develop a solution for this with/at grub-upstream so that we > > don't end up with conflicting solutions between distributions > > which stomp all over each-others data. > > > Agreed. But if we decide to use a separate partition with a properly > supported filesystem, we might as well pick it now rather than make > changes twice, right? > The thing is that implementing this proposal should be straightforward and something that could be done for F34 but solving the grubenv issue will require more time, since we first will need to agree with GRUB upstream on the approach. Also, switching existing installations to the configuration scheme mentioned in this proposal should be feasible but changing the partition layout would be much more risky. That's why I believe that even if we solve the grubenv issue (i.e: in F35), this should only be for new installations and storing grubenv as a file has to be supported for backward compatibility. > Chris suggested using a BIOS Boot partition, but another possible > option is to use XBOOTLDR from > https://systemd.io/BOOT_LOADER_SPECIFICATION/ - which the BLS actually > prefers over the ESP if found. > Chris' suggestion (unless I misunderstood) is not to use a partition with a filesystem but instead a partition where the grubenv could be stored as raw data. That way GRUB should be able to read and write the grubenv block without using any of its filesystem code (that's supposed to be read-only). Best regards, Javier _______________________________________________ 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
