On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 3:10 PM Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mi, 10.05.23 17:54, Chris Murphy (lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > > > Read-only drivers, which are the only drivers under discussion here, > > aren't a per se problem because they can't modify the file > > system. So they have no complaints about that. > > No. Not true. There could (in theory) exist a read-only implementation of a journaling file system that applied the journal as part of its processing in memory (or some other transitory copy method). To say that would be extremely fragile is an understatement (it is, in essence, a full implementation of the filesystem code). I can't say I am a great fan of the fat filesystem, but it is ubiquitous, and part of the machine boot standards. Proposing an alternative may be an interesting intellectual exercise, but one needs to work with the various industry consortium's to make it a viable reality and then wait 10+ years before it get implemented everywhere, and 20+ years before someone will not complain you are obsoleting some perfectly usable hardware. Quite honestly, I think that if the end game is likely UKI on the ESP even 500MB might be a little small, as one needs not only space for the kernel images, but firmware updates (and some firmware update images are getting rather large), and any alternative OS files, but it is much better than 200MB. _______________________________________________ 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
