Re: F37 proposal: Install Using GPT on x86_64 BIOS by Default (System-Wide Change proposal)

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

 



On Sun, May 29, 2022 at 6:56 AM Peter Boy <pboy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Am 14.05.2022 um 18:45 schrieb Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GPTforBIOSbyDefault
> >
> > This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
> > process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
> > community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
> > by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
> >
> > == Summary ==
> > This Change makes it so that Fedora Linux systems installed on legacy
> > x86 BIOS systems will get GPT partitioning by default instead of
> > legacy MBR partitioning. This makes x86 BIOS installs more similar to
> > x86 UEFI installs.
> >
> > == Owner ==
> > * Name: [[User:Ngompa| Neal Gompa]], [[User:Dcavalca| Davide
> > Cavalca]], [[User:Salimma| Michel Alexandre Salim]],
> > [[User:Chrismurphy| Chris Murphy]]
> > * Email: ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx, dcavalca@xxxxxx, michel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> > chrismurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > == Detailed Description ==
> > Once implemented, Anaconda will create a GPT disk table on
> > non-partitioned disks or when the disk is being completely reset when
> > Fedora x86 install/live media is booted in BIOS mode.
>
> Fedora Server WG discussed the proposal and insists that the proposal be deferred until Anaconda can install software raid on biosboot systems with GPT (see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2088113 and https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/server@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/thread/VSM473WRHKIIIJYZZCVXAO7XFS4ACHPH/) - at least for Fedora Server where software raid is a common use.

What's the basis for holding up this feature though? Yes it's a bug,
but it wouldn't be a release blocking bug because there's no release
criteria covering degraded boot. And on UEFI we already have this
problem because multiple ESPs aren't created or populated (sync'd). I
think it's a worthwhile use case to improve the current behavior so
that it works, but I don't think it's OK to hold up a release
indefinitely while insisting other people do the work required to
bring such functionality to Fedora.


-- 
Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[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