On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 6:19 PM Peter Boy <pboy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Am 02.06.2022 um 22:42 schrieb Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > > It's not standard at all. We don't even test for this setup regularly. > > It's not a test case, and it's not even supposed to work right now. > > It’s standard as it is a typical use case in private or SME environments. If that's true there should be plenty of people willing to put in the work to make this work reliably. So far they haven't, in particular on UEFI. > And do you really think we distribute dmraid for years now "and it's not even supposed to work right now.“? dmraid is deprecated in favor of either mdadm or LVM based RAID (both use the kernel's md driver as the backend), for a very long time. dmraid is even deprecate at least as far back as RHEL 7.6 > And don't hide behind formalistic arguments that just suit you by chance. Your change proposal deliberately makes it impossible for existing server users (or makes it unnecessarily overly difficult) who have relied (and could rely) on us so far to continue using Fedora Server. I consider this irresponsible. And I don't understand why you stubbornly insist on this change proposal as is, instead of looking for solutions that keep mischief away from our users and change to GPT as default (which is undoubtedly the future standard). GPT is already the default when the drive size is > 2 TB, for about a decade. GPT is the default on UEFI since the start. So the problem you're talking about, while real, seems to be a low enough of a priority that no one really wants to fix the problem - so far. You continue to use emotionally charged language as both a distraction from the real issue as well as a motivator to stop a feature. The reality is MBR support is going away, because BIOS support is going away. This feature is part of moving forward with that reality. We cannot make people do work they don't want to do. The solution to the degraded raid problem is actually relatively well understood, it's just that insufficient resources have come forward to actually solve the issue. But that cannot be an impediment for making other necessary changes. > > Also, any system with drives >=2TB will get GPT automatically, you > > can't have MBR in those setups. All this does is remove the default > > special case for smaller disks. > > This is a completely different case. For disks > 2 TB simply nothing changes, neither better nor worse. For disks < 2 TB your change proposal results in a deterioration. Why do you want it so badly? It's not completely different, it results in the *exact* problem you're complaining about. You don't get to say the effect of GPT > 2T is OK, but it's a negative when applied to < 2T as if your entire strategy for working "standard" and "typical" use cases means < 2T drives are mandatory. If the use case is important, the issue needs to be fixed. -- 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
