Hi,
On 6/22/23 12:28, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/cleanup_systemd_install
== Detailed Description ==
As a first pass, the 'inst.sdboot' option already in anaconda should
work. As it stands, that replaces grub+shim with the systemd-boot
loader, and moves the kernel + initrd to the EFI system partition
(ESP).
In general, I think it's great to see this happening. Thank you!
Well thanks for looking at it :)
It doesn't attempt to create unified kernel images, so the
existing `dnf update`, `kdumpctl`, and `make install` in a kernel
source directory should all work.
Nitpick: 'make install' invokes /usr/bin/installkernel which (sometimes?)
invokes kernel-install which will create a UKI, if the configuration
specifies that. This sentence implies that 'make install' has some
issue with UKIs, but that is not true.
/usr/bin/installkernel does a lot of stuff, most of it probably wrong.
We could 'ln -sf --relative /usr/bin/kernel-install /usr/sbin/installkernel'
and then 'make install' would work without grubby.
Right, which is one of the 1/2 dozen things in the sdubby package, and
with my limited testing appears to work fine.
The vast majority of this work has
been done, leaving only two action items, removing grubby from core,
and merging a shimming package (sdubby) into the fedora repos.
As I wrote before in the bug, what is really grubby and sdubby needed for?
Most of what grubby does is arcane archaic stuff that we don't need.
With grubby/sdubby we have an additional layer that adds complexity
and is very inflexible. Why can't we have Anaconda write the Boot Loader
Specification files directly or invoke kernel-install?
The critical missing piece of grubby has been the BLS entry
manipulation, usually adding or stripping kernel boot parameters. Which
at least in fedora, grubby's shell "API" is the defacto way for other
programs (ex: kdumpctl) to perform this. That is what is being provided
in the sdubby package, outside of symlinks and packaging stuff. So, your
right there is a _LOT_ of seemingly redundant stuff in grubby if the
system fits into the somewhat narrow set of criteria already required
for systemd-boot. AKA basic UEFI secure boot path without 3rd party
kernel modules/etc.
Maybe a better name would have been bls-entry-tools, since its largely
just shimming between bootctl and everything else with sed. It might
make sense from a fedora perspective if something like bootctl did this
by default, but at least when it comes to output formats/etc its a bit
ugly, and I don't really think the grubby "API" as such is being used by
anyone outside of the fedora derived distros.
So, it makes sense if that functionality exists, that anaconda would use
it, rather than attempting an install only version. Hence why this isn't
in anaconda.
Thanks again,
jlinton
_______________________________________________
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
