[systemd-devel] why does bootctl default to /boot and not to /boot/efi?

[Mantas Mikulėnas]

I'd buy into it if vfat weren't so brittle – several times I had to use
syslinux in /boot because the ESP lost *both* kernels I had in it... "sync;
sync; unmount; mount; check" was part of my kernel update ritual for a
while. Maybe it's the Linux driver, maybe it's my UEFI that's bad at FAT, I
dunno.

I use /boot as ESP on the work laptop, but not really going to merge them
on the personal one just yet.

On Wed, Jun 1, 2016, 11:47 Colin Guthrie <gmane at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:

> Lennart Poettering wrote on 30/05/16 17:47:
> > hence an acceptable alternatively might be to
> > introduce /efi and mount the esp there, and simply not have /boot on
> > legacy free systems.
>
> This might be the pragmatic way to get this schema more widely adopted.
> kernel-install could be modified to detect which is used and copy the
> kernel to the appropriate directory (or copy it to both).
>
> I really like the ESP as /boot approach but it's hard to get people to
> buy into it :(
>
> Col
>
> --
>
> Colin Guthrie
> gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie
> http://colin.guthr.ie/
>
> Day Job:
>   Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/
> Open Source:
>   Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/
>   PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/
>   Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> systemd-devel mailing list
> systemd-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20160601/4df1b805/attachment-0001.html>