On 05/16/2018 10:26 PM, Frank Scheiner wrote: > On 05/16/2018 09:16 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote: >> Ok, I just successfully tested this change. >> >> Two questions left:
I just realized I can't count to four :). >> 1. Can you test whether we can drop the /boot partition on Sun >> partition tables? > > I actually don't remember if I tested such a configuration. At least > d-i/grub-installer should support this now. I'll check that on my T5220 and > report back. Ok, thank you. > Just a thought: > > Could it happen that - depending on the size of the root FS and the amount of > packages installed - the GRUB image gets installed so far away from the start > of a > disk - it usually gets installed at the end of an installation - that older > machines with older OBP versions could have problems to access it via block > lists? > Are there any such limits? > > If yes, a separate smaller partition for "/boot" might be required in such a > case. That's a very good heads-up. I completely forgot about block lists. I agree, it could potentially cause problems. So, maybe we should keep the /boot partition. But I think we can drop the "bootable" flag, can't we? >> >> 2. Now that we can use GRUB, what about updating the default >> partitioning scheme? Maybe one that is inspired by the layout >> used on ppc64el: >> >> > >> https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/partman-auto/tree/master/recipes-ppc64el > > You want to add "$defaultignore{ }" for the "/boot" partition, so it's only > active by default for installations using LVM? Maybe there are also other use > cases > for a separate "/boot" partition than LVM. Such a change would make it harder > for people with those other use cases then. Well, people can still do a complete manual partitioning, so we don't force anything. I am also fully open to any further suggestions. I just thought that - at least with GPT partitioning - we don't need a separate /boot partition. Maybe we should add "$iflabel { sun }" for the separate /boot partition. Would that work? >> 3. GRUB installs fine now on Sun partition tables without any further ado? > > For my tested configuration - t5220, atomic recipe, single disk - yes. Thanks for the confirmation. >> 4. And, just to be safe: Your previous mail contained hashes >> before the partition layout lines (#). You did not actually >> have those in your atomic file, correct? > > Correct, those # marks were just for "markup" and not included in the actual > recipe I modified from the installer environment. Ok, thanks. So, to summarize: 1. Can you test whether adding "$iflabel { sun }" creates the separate /boot partition for you? 2. Do you need "$bootable { }" for /boot to work with GRUB? Adrian -- .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
