Re: F39 proposal: BiggerESP (Self-Contained Change proposal)

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

 



On Wed, May 10, 2023 at 03:52:51PM -0000, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-05-09 at 18:32 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > 
> > It sounds reasonable for sure.
> > The only concern is, given Microsoft creates at most 500MB ESP
> > partitions, are we sure all UEFI systems out there will not choke on a
> > 1GB one?
> > 
> > Can't we reduce the number of kernels by having *only* one UKI and a
> > rescue one that can be used to restore the previous working UKI from
> > /root if the active one fails?
> > 
> > Or perhaps just have always 2 UKI (current, and former working).
> > Do we actually need a separate dedicated rescue UKI? Can't rescue be
> > implemented by booting the previously working UKI with a "rescue"
> > command line option ?
> 
> Word of caution on 'rescue' images: MSFT just had to essentially
> render 10 years of recovery/install media unbootable due to the
> black lotus vulnerability. It was not (and still is not) pretty.
> 
> When there's signatures and verifications involved, you really
> want an upgradable system. But if you set that whole infrastructure
> up, there's really not that much difference left with an A/B scheme.

If the idea to allow a UKI to contain multiple alternate, signed,
cmdline line profiles gets accepted [1], then a "rescue" image
won't neccessarily need to be a separate image anymore. There could
just be an alternative cmdline that caused the initrd to launch in
a "rescue" / "safe" mode, and that would be nicely complemented by
an A/B scheme to cope with bad kernel upgrades.

With regards,
Daniel

[1] https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/24539
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
_______________________________________________
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




[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