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

[Mantas Mikulėnas]

Hmm, I thought Windows creates a 512 MB ESP by default (as per MS's own
recommendations)?

(With both Windows and two Arch kernels I've yet to run out of space on a
200 MB one. I guess it's different for Ubuntu which likes to hoard more
kernel packages than it can fit...)

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016, 04:53 Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 2:46 AM, 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 :(
>
> Well it's a non-starter for dual boot because the existing Windows and
> OS X ESP's are too small to host kernels, and I'm not aware of any
> installer that'll create an additional ESP or grow an existing one.
>
> Next, it rather seems like rearranging the deck chairs. There's no
> major advantage. The boot manager gets a bit smaller but now it's
> mandatory to put the kernel and initramfs on the ESP, unlike any other
> OS. You get to drop the 500MB ext4 /boot, but now you have to have a
> 500MB or possibly larger, FAT32 /boot, in order to hold 4 kernels and
> initramfs's. When those initramfs's are the nohostonly or reproducible
> variety, they're currently 50MB on Fedora 24. So
> kernel+system.map+initramfs = ~60MB which is ~60x bigger than most
> boot managers. And some use cases will want posix permissions and
> xattr support, which is lacking on FAT; and still others that will
> want the initramfs at least on an encrypted volume.
>
> It think it'd be better to put an EFI wrapper around the GRUB fs
> modules, so any UEFI boot manager inherits the ability to read
> anything GRUB already supports: cryptoluks, mdraid, lvm, btrfs, xfs,
> ext4, etc. No one actually needs to reinvent the fs wheel for each
> UEFI boot manager.
>
> But I do agree with the criticism of nested mounts, e.g. /boot/efi, as
> well as persistently mounting the ESP, which is also
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160602/2871c09a/attachment.html>