On 09/21/2017 11:14 PM, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
Well as long as grub can read that, then no problem. So as long as
grub-install is including btrfs support in the grub image placed in the
prep boot partition, then /boot can be on btrfs. That is almost certainly
the case.
Yeah, I guess that's the big advantage of GRUB. That it can handle all these
new and fancy filesystems :).
Ok, so I guess we can basically rule out GPT for the default label even
on POWER systems. I would therefore then vote for using MS-DOS partition
tables on POWER systems, i.e. what is already used now.
For powerpc/ppc64 I would agree. For ppc64el GPT should be fine, and
I believe someone said that is in fact what they have done since it is
power8+ only.
Touching ppc64el was never up for discussion. I was just mentioning it.
So, MS-DOS partition tables will not work at all on a Mac, correct?
Not as far as I know. And given the apple partition table is better
anyhow, why would you want to?
I was just wondering whether it makes sense for GRUB to use MS-DOS partition
on a Mac, thinking it may be better than Mac partition tables, I was
basically just thinking aloud. If it's not necessary for GRUB to work
properly, then we can stick with the current partition scheme, of course.
FWIW, I made this change [1] to partman-partitioning now which will result
to debian-installer using the same disk labels on ppc64 for the various
sub-architectures as on powerpc. There are, of course, no 64-Bit OldWorld
Macs, Cell CPUs and so on, but I guess my change is more elegant than
duplicating
the case statement for ppc64 and removing all the unsupported subarchitectures.
Adrian
[1]
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/d-i/partman-partitioning.git/commit/?id=6bb0eaf810bced7f8f637a14df82d3122b56ecaa
--
.''`. 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
