On Mi, 21.12.22 12:21, Neal Gompa (ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > > Why shouldn't FAT be used for /boot. In an EFI world, /boot > > > > is used for the same functional pupose as the ESP, which is > > > > already going to use FAT. > > > > > > Doesn't support links, lournaling and ACLs. > > > > What you want in a boot loader: native read access, write access. > > Actually no, I don't want the boot loader / boot manager writing > anything. Well, good for you. But I think it would be wise for Fedora to implement automatic fallback for hosed kernels, and that requires counting boot attempts, and that requires storing the counters somewhere. And that means we need to store something somewhere. Hence write access from pre-boot is typically desirable. Basically, there are too places a boot loader can write stuff: file system and NVRAM. The latter is problematic to write to since cheap hw supposedly doesn't allow too many write cycles before breaking. Hence file system it must be. If Fedora every intends to be useful for people who cannot recover a hosed system on their own because they are Linux guru themselves, I am pretty sure we want automatic boot assessment/fallback logic in place. And similar for server/embedded stuff. If fedora wants to be deployed in such worlds, it's kinda nice if we can automatically recover from hosed updates. I am sure Neal Gompa can recover his own machines, but not every Fedora system comes with a Neal Gompa deployment included. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Berlin _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
