2010/11/22 Robert Millan :
>> Let's just dig into the reason why the embedding area is small in the
>> cases you've seen. I suspect that it may just be a simple bug, and
>> won't require policy changes to fix.
>
> I'm short on time currently but I'll hopefully be able to do this
> before the relea
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> 2010/11/18 Colin Watson :
> > (Obviously, we can only control the size of the embedding area when
> > we're creating the partition table from scratch; trying to move existing
> > operating systems around transparently is bad karma. I
2010/11/18 Colin Watson :
> As a point of information, it's not just about Windows compatibility.
> Optimal alignment is valuable for performance on many modern drives.
> Cylinder alignment used to be a performance win but hasn't been needed
> for (I believe) decades. If you align to 2048 sectors (
On Sat, Nov 13, 2010 at 10:48:31PM +0100, Robert Millan wrote:
> When using MSDOS labels, an embed region (empty space)
> before first partition was usually reserved. This used to be
> 62 sectors, which is enough for most filesystems (and GRUB
> developers have worked hard to ensure our filesystem
With the introduction of ZFS support in D-I, an existing problem with
size of embed area in partition labels begins to manifest. This
problem is not specific to ZFS, it affects any filesystem when its
readonly implementation in GRUB reaches certain size.
When using MSDOS labels, an embed region (
5 matches
Mail list logo
