Hi,

> We're trusting a lot more than two fs drivers...
> 
> %global grub_modules  " all_video boot blscfg btrfs           \\\
>                       cat configfile cryptodisk               \\\
>                       echo ext2 f2fs fat font                 \\\
>                       gcry_rijndael gcry_rsa gcry_serpent     \\\
>                       gcry_sha256 gcry_twofish gcry_whirlpool \\\
>                       gfxmenu gfxterm gzio                    \\\
>                       halt hfsplus http increment iso9660     \\\
>                       jpeg loadenv loopback linux lvm luks    \\\
>                       luks2                                   \\\
>                       memdisk                                 \\\
>                       mdraid09 mdraid1x minicmd net           \\\
>                       normal part_apple part_msdos part_gpt   \\\
>                       password_pbkdf2 pgp png reboot regexp   \\\
>                       search search_fs_uuid search_fs_file    \\\
>                       search_label serial sleep               \\\
>                       squash4                                 \\\
>                       syslinuxcfg                             \\\
>                       test tftp version video xfs zstd "
> 
> These are all in the signed grubx64.efi binary.

There are two classes of grub modules though.  Only the ones declared
"trusted" are loaded in case secure boot is turned on.

> GRUB is enabling Fedora to support a wide assortment of architectures,
> some of which do not use UEFI. Therefore sd-boot isn't a drop in
> replacement, and therefore it would be an additional boot loader, and
> partitioning layout.

There is no need for a different partitioning layout (except when it
comes to supporting existing installs).  Using vfat /boot everywhere
is an option, and it would cut down the number of grub modules needed
alot.

> There's a lot of implied work to do and not a lot of people ready,
> willing, and able to do that work.

Indeed.  And grub tying to support every filesystem under the sun
is IMHO part of the problem.

> > in particular quite complex ones that are eyed with quite some
> > animosity from kernel upstream.
> 
> I have no idea what this is a reference to or how it could be
> relevant.

kernel filesystem people do not like grub having its own filesystem
implementations, especially when it comes to broken write access
(bypassing the journal etc).

take care,
  Gerd

-- 
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
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/[email protected]
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to