t any issue."
If the rationale behind this is a maintenance burden, I would be happy to
assist with maintaining the package. Many people still use mod_php, in fact
it's the standard way to configure PHP with Apache on just about every server
that is currently running. Dropping mod_php
rpreter."
>
> But when I proposed that, I was not aware main developer had been hired
> by Apple. And like people have replied before, they don't like the Clang
> (C, C++ LLVM-based compiler) I guess in good part because of the more
> permissive license than GPL it us
On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote:
> Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit :
>
> > Please do not drop mod_php. It is NOT the case that "php-fpm is already
> > used but most users of httpd and nginx without any issue."
&g
On Friday, May 29, 2020 1:24:30 AM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 01:00 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, May 28, 2020 11:59:41 PM MST Remi Collet wrote:
> >
> > > Le 29/05/2020 à 06:15, John M. Harris Jr a écrit :
> > >
>
;
>
> On 2020-05-29 1:01 a.m., John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > Paul,
> > What benefit do you see in the overhead of LLVM IR, compared to standard
> > packages?
>
>
> John,
>
> Where do you see overhead in the distribution of LLVM IR?
See below respons
Err, what does WebAssembly have to do with real programs?
> IOW, it doesn't make sense to invest much in LLVM IR versus WebAssembly.
WebAssembly is just in web browsers. It's not for normal software you'd
install with your package manager. U
one into
hibernation. It took about 30 seconds to boot back in, but I was right where I
left off. What exactly is broken, and for what portion of users?
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
Splentity
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe se
On Friday, May 29, 2020 5:25:23 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:06 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I'm sorry, but this makes absolutely no sense.
>
>
> Disliking the story is not the same thing as it not making sense.
> T
On Friday, May 29, 2020 5:15:45 PM MST Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020, at 8:01 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
>
> > WebAssembly is just in web browsers. It's not for normal software you'd
> > install with your package manager. Unless I'm missi
il discussion. It's
> short because it needs more work and the developer hasn't found enough
> time to get back into it yet.
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
A good option until then is to just take unsigned hibernation images and work
like literally every other system. There's no r
On Saturday, May 30, 2020 12:36:46 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 9:12 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Friday, May 29, 2020 5:25:23 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 6:06 PM John M. Harris
and empowered to make this
> change.
>
> Regards, Joe
If it's dropped, it wouldn't really be possible for me to make a mod_php
package to replace it due to the integration, so I can't really see a way of
keeping a compat package if it's removed, and keeping it ar
ere are two emails, bottom one is the first.
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/CAJCQCtQVGqxtZZTRgscT7e4inTacAd7KAmoNOz3gB4
> hf1nk...@mail.gmail.com/
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists
On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 10:52:07 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 8:42 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
>
> > In what way is it incompatible with UEFI Secure Boot?
>
>
> Secure Boot does boot verification. Hibernation right now doesn't. And
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 12:06:19 PM MST Simo Sorce wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-06-02 at 21:58 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 9:45:45 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 10:28 PM Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > >
&g
On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 12:08:44 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 12:18 AM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday, June 2, 2020 10:52:07 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 8:42 PM John M. Harris Jr
'm skeptical that pin shorts permit you to gain access
> to such things - but if so, it's clearly a vulnerability that should
> be reported.
This is by design. Generally, there's a marking on the silkscreen with
something like "PWD"
r
Agreed. Besides, GNOME already has this enabled, right? It's definitely not
right for servers, as I brought up the last time this was thrown around.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe
moment anyway.
At the moment, it seems that hibernation is only broken on systems with Secure
Boot enabled, because of a kernel lockdown anti-feature.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
ed, but not those
running Fedora. We don't have numbers to support that claim, and most devices
require "Secure Boot" to be disabled, or to have the mode changed so that it
accepts new keys, to install Fedora.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
On Friday, June 5, 2020 11:12:10 AM MST Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 2:09 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Friday, June 5, 2020 10:49:52 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 4:35 A
the user's decision, and not add a zram device on
upgraded systems. This would lead to less unexpected behavior. I'd support
that, for sure :)
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscri
On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:03:03 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 11:47 AM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, June 4, 2020 11:54:37 PM MST Kevin Kofler wrote:
>
>
>
> > > Also -1 to adding something to the core syst
On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:12:40 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:07 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Friday, June 5, 2020 11:48:14 AM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at
On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:16:36 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:10 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:03:03 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
>
>
>
> > > In discussions with both cloud and server folk
On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:38:01 PM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:18 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:12:40 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:07 PM John M. Harris Jr <
> >
On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:39:05 PM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:19 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 5, 2020 12:16:36 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 1:10 PM John M. Harris Jr <
> >
On Friday, June 5, 2020 4:32:55 PM MST Przemek Klosowski via devel wrote:
> On 6/4/20 1:36 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, June 3, 2020 9:05:22 PM MST Chris Murphy wrote:
> >
> >> UEFI Secure Boot doesn't prevent you from gaining access to firmwa
ompletely agreed, going about it this way would also address most of my
concerns with this change, as it would mean it's easy for people like myself
to opt out.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsub
On Friday, June 5, 2020 11:57:50 PM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 6/5/20 11:43 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > Completely agreed, going about it this way would also address most of my
> > concerns with this change, as it would mean it's easy for people like
> > myse
has
> feature parity, we can definitely consider trying it out. But the
> referene compiler works just well.
>
>
> >
> >
> > Core system components should be written in C. The higher layers (UI,
> > extra
> > CLI tools, etc.) can use C++ as well. IMHO, any
On Saturday, June 6, 2020 1:15:35 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 6/6/20 12:42 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On my laptop, a Lenovo X200T with Core(TM)2 Duo CPU U9300; 6 GiB RAM,
> > enabling swap on zram led to increased CPU usage (Always above 13% where
> > normall
o the swap device. Also, the zpool memory cache is
> preallocated, unlike zram devices.
>
> (I am not going to envy any who decide to implement zswap on a system
> with ZFS. Wait wait wait, which zpool are you talking about?!)
Which zswap are you talking about?
Swap on compressed zvol
On Saturday, June 6, 2020 3:16:02 PM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 6/6/20 10:41 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, June 6, 2020 1:15:35 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/6/20 12:42 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
.
>
> 1: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/SwapOnZRAM#Why_not_zswap.3F
> 2:
> https://github.com/Hi-Angel/scripts/blob/master/warn-on-low-memory.pl
Zswap sounds like an excellent idea to look into instead of zram. Not only
that, but it'd allow traditional
; I was also aware of zram-generator but it doesn't look as polished in
> terms of integration or documentation.
Well, that's really the point. The one you're using is one of the (4? 5?)
other zram implementations. It seems a bit more straightforward than the
systemd one for sur
ers, systemd-growfs, and an ever growing list of absurd
things thrown into an init system.
These things are not discoverable at all. This stuff really needs to stop
trying to guess what the user/sysadmin wants to do.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
deve
On Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:24:02 AM MST Kevin Kofler wrote:
> John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > I wonder if we could get that masked in Fedora Server and KDE Spin,
> > potentially along with homed, userdb, repart (Who in the world thought
> > this was a good idea?), resolve
admin when I voted on the 28th of
last month. (I later got the badge with the URL generated by voting for a
different position)
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lis
On Thursday, June 11, 2020 9:09:53 PM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> We are working on getting this install moved over to recent
> fedora or rhel, but for now it's rhel7 and python34.
RHEL7 is better than RHEL8 anyway. ;)
I'm planning to skip RHEL8 entirely, it's totally b0rked
On Friday, June 12, 2020 2:26:43 AM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Thu, 2020-06-11 at 21:24 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, June 11, 2020 9:09:53 PM MST Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> >
> > > We are working on getting this install moved over to recent
> > &
ct hints as what the result will be anyway. I have
> zero confidence that anything will be done, so here I am sending an email.
>
>
> So, could anything be done about any of this?
The projects themselves don't care what we actually support, it's the views of
a very vocal
On Friday, June 12, 2020 12:04:06 PM MST Michael Catanzaro wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 9:47 am, John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
>
> > Why?
>
>
> John, this was a thread about a data center move. There was no need to
> change the topic. :)
That wasn't a chan
On Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:50:55 AM MST Kevin Kofler wrote:
> John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > What's even more wild is that you can't easily disable it. Even though
> > it's supposed to be disabled ("vendor preset: disabled") it's actually
> &
erent artifact type,
> or add separate discrete repos per Application Stream, etc.
Why is this a concern for RHEL9, where it wasn't for RHEL8? Moving to
Modularity has certainly hurt RHEL7 migrations for exactly that reason,
customers are forced to learn something ent
On Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:22:08 PM MST Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 1:59 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, June 18, 2020 6:24:46 AM MST Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > > The base requirement is that the UX rema
@redhat.com
>
>
> Absolute -1!
>
> IMHO, removing working packages from users' systems just because the new
> release no longer ships them is entirely unnecessary and a total disservice
> to users.
Agreed, this Change would irrecoverably harm users'
.
It's one of the key issues with the tech.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 2:40:48 PM MST Neal Gompa wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:25 PM John M. Harris Jr
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Saturday, June 20, 2020 4:42:17 AM MST Neal Gompa wrote:
> >
> > > TL;DR benefits of modularity for Fedora:
> >
On Saturday, June 20, 2020 4:37:06 PM MST Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2020 at 17:42, Neal Gompa wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 5:25 PM John M. Harris Jr
> > wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > > On Saturday, June
alternative, I would like to recommend we make Emacs the default. Emacs
does not require "specialist knowledge", but is much more powerful once you do
learn how to use it properly. It's also not as hard to use as nano.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
r SELinux yes or not, it may be a good idea but IMNSHO it is
> not for a development machine.
I definitely agree on taking out "rhgb quiet", that's annoying as all hell,
not knowing what's going on during the boot process.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
y
of them have any interest or knowledge of kernel or dracut debugging,
especially now that systemd is part of the boot process. Those users who know
how to debug that also know how to disable those cmdline options.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
__
d as far as I'm aware.
For me, dnf completion went from taking a few seconds to several minutes.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fe
quot;.
We're getting to the point where there are so many things that "advanced users
will know how to configure", it's absolutely absurd. You spend the first week
with a fresh install customizing all the little things that used to be
defaults, back when
am Test Day] to
> discover edge cases, and tweak the default configuration if necessary
> to establish a good one-size-fits all approach.
>
>
> == User Experience ==
>
> The user won't notice anything displeasing. If their usual workload
> causes them to dread swap t
Blocks product? Workstation and KDE
>
> == Documentation ==
>
> Strictly speaking no documentation is required reading for users. But
> there will be some Fedora documentation to help get the ball rolling.
>
> For those who want to know more:
>
> [https://btrfs.w
e that the user
backlash will act as a wakeup call when it comes to these changes. I agree
that btrfs is far too unstable to be made a default, and I also agree that ZFS
would be a much better option. However, there is always going to be pushback
on ZFS. If you want the best, there's a p
case.
Has that actually been explored? How does Canonical get around the legal
issues with OpenZFS' licensing?
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fed
On Saturday, June 27, 2020 1:06:01 PM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 09:58 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> > I definitely agree on taking out "rhgb quiet", that's annoying as all
> > hell,
> > not knowing what's going on during the boot p
On Saturday, June 27, 2020 9:50:20 AM MST John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> On Thursday, June 25, 2020 10:18:59 AM MST Ben Cotton wrote:
>
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/UseNanoByDefault
> >
> > == Summary ==
> >
> > Let's make Fedora more appr
On Saturday, June 27, 2020 12:34:17 PM MST Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:25:01AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > Jesus Christ, this actually got approved. It's time to fork Fedora. This
> > is really getting out of hand.
>
>
>
> As
lib/environment.d was to avoid setting more
> environment variables in random places in various shell scripts. But if
> that only works in GNOME, I guess it's not a great solution after all.
Actually, that may be the perfect solution.. This way, it'd be a self
contained chang
gt; It doesn't even take extra space. Only uses the bottom row that
> > would otherwise be empty.
>
>
> Fine :) https://github.com/gwsw/less/issues/72
See Markus Larsson's comment on this above...
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
t very 'just
> >press the button to do something you may or may not understand', but it
> >targets new users as part of firstboot, and introduces them in a somewhat
> >friendly way to how things look under the covers, so they can make
> >adjustments as their
On Sunday, June 28, 2020 12:18:32 PM MST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 03:34:17PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:25:01AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> >
> > > Jesus Christ, this actually got approve
y /
boot. I'm not sure if btrfs has the same issue there?
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fed
gt; mount options. But an actual solution must not require any
> customization.
If you really believe that, I really don't understand why are you in favor of
all of these changes with the justification being "People who don't like it
can just
On Sunday, June 28, 2020 5:37:08 PM MST Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, John M. Harris Jr said:
>
> > XFS proved to be troublesome, and still is up to the latest of RHEL7. It's
> > not uncommon to have to run xfs_repair on smaller XFS partitions,
> > espec
On Sunday, June 28, 2020 7:51:40 PM MST Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 10:32:34AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > > Fine :) https://github.com/gwsw/less/issues/72
> >
> > See Markus Larsson's comment on this above...
>
>
> Yeah
number of times
that having root on ZFS has led to me waiting on kernel updates over the past
three years on one hand, and could still do so if I had half as many fingers!
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.or
't a US company, and unlike Red Hat they aren't
> the same tempting target for a lawsuit.
I fail to see how being a US company or not would have much bearing on this.
As for being a "tempting target", they're both big tech companies providing a
Linux distro as their prim
On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:18:28 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 6/28/20 11:35 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > For the best filesystem ever created, ZFS, I can't say that I agree with
> > your assessment of that value. Having ZFS in Fedora would throw Fedora
> > o
On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:32:56 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 6/29/20 12:27 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:18:28 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/28/20 11:35 PM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >&
On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:54:02 AM MST Igor Raits wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 00:37 -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:32:56 AM MST Samuel Sieb wrote:
> >
> > > On 6/29/20 12:27 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> > >
> > &
On Monday, June 29, 2020 1:09:16 AM MST Markus Larsson wrote:
> On 29 June 2020 08:26:21 CEST, "John M. Harris Jr"
> wrote:
> >On Sunday, June 28, 2020 5:37:08 PM MST Chris Adams wrote:
> >
> >> Once upon a time, John M. Harris Jr said:
> >>
> &
On Monday, June 29, 2020 12:58:30 AM MST Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 01:32:41PM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
*snip*
> > - Mask/disable systemd-homed
>
>
> Doesn't do anything unless you create some users with homectl.
There's
On Monday, June 29, 2020 9:26:09 AM MST Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 09:59:52AM -0700, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
> > > We cannot include ZFS in Fedora for legal reasons. Additionally, ZFS is
> > > not really intended for the laptop use case.
> &g
for a long time in NetworkManager.
> All that changes here is the default of this option.
>
> * Contingency mechanism: revert the change
> * Contingency deadline: beta freeze
> * Blocks release? No
>
> == Documentation ==
> I am not aware of documentation that ge
ile instead of ifcfg-rh
if modified by one of the NetworkManager dbus clients, but otherwise leave
ifcfg-rh?
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.
h do actually need
> this device-mapper-multipath the server installation iso can be used and
> this is a better fit for such installations.
Actually, multipath is used outside of datacenters and enterprise setups. A
better solution would be to use Anaconda to include it when configured
would mean that
users' workstations or servers using firmware RAID wouldn't be able to boot..
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora
ve image has? If that wouldn't be
trivial, it may be best to just disable it if it's unused, which would leave
the functionality for those who use it, without affecting the boot times of
those who don't use it.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
refore a different license is fine.
> Dell, a friggin huge US company, wouldn't distribute Ubuntu with their
> laptops if they as the distributor did something illegal.
That's a good point, I didn't think about that. Additionally, having the
context from Linus is
sibility of the start of the Grumpy Old Neckbeard Spin (actual name
TBD).
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https:
Linode, DigitalOcean, and most other cloud providers would cease to be able
to boot Fedora. I'm very much against this proposal.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le
hosts based on RHEL7. I'm not sure about RHEL8, but in Fedora, you can install
edk2-ovmf, if it's not already installed, to get UEFI support.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send
time in low-memory situations.
>
> The following is the default earlyoom configuration:
>
> * If both RAM and swap go below 10% free, earlyoom sends the SIGTERM signal
> to the process with the largest oom_score.
> * If both RAM and swap go below 5% free, earlyoom
On Tuesday, June 30, 2020 11:29:13 AM MST Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> On 30.6.2020 17:49, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 30, 2020 6:34:27 AM MST Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote:
> >> Given Hans proposal [1] introduced systemd/grub2/Gnome upstream changes
> >
on saying
> they want btrfs" or "FESCo says use btrfs as default". Yes it says
> "desktop variants" but only 1 variant really counts and that is
> Workstation. So yes, either Workstation agrees to it or it isn&#x
eturning to Fedora.
> Bottom line I think this will be a good move for the distribution and a
> good time to start looking into and make that move.
I have to disagree. The more systemd bloat that gets thrown into the mix, the
more concerned I become with this path. We already have a power
t; something like that discourage a user from using Fedora? :)
>
>
> Given that you have not changed an entry in your boot loader for quite
> sometime or perhaps ever it would actually be better that you yourself
> setup Fedora using sd-boot as the boot manager and compar
hreaded boot management application.
GRUB2 supports UEFI well, probably better than systemd-bloat. At the same
time, it's much more flexible in other aspects, providing users with the
ability to boot their system in a number of situations that systemd-bloat
doesn't support, as well as pro
tualization setup, employs iSCSI so that I
can migrate VMs between my various virtualization hosts.
In order to create a new drive, I'd have to create a new LUN just for a
32-64MiB block device.. Not impossible by any means, but not as simple as the
above. This would be similarly &
n, and all while
> things become simpler. Much simpler.
>
> Lennart
>
> --
> Lennart Poettering, Berlin
Lennart,
We don't need more systemd-bloat just to boot our systems. However your
bootloader works, it doesn't really matter if it's not up to snuff w
On Thursday, July 2, 2020 5:08:14 AM MST Brandon Nielsen wrote:
> On 7/2/20 12:55 AM, John M. Harris Jr wrote:
>
>
>
>
> >
> > Lennart,
> >
> > We don't need more systemd-bloat just to boot our systems. However your
> > bootloader works, it
ther when it fails to build and is generally ignored.
It's used for ISO boot by Fedora itself, and is the preferred PXE method, the
alternative being GRUB. It's a powerful bootloader, I don't see anything that
needs changing in it.
--
John M. Harris, Jr.
__
looong time but hopefully there are other areas we can improve upon
> which helps us improve the overall UEFI experience in Fedora etc.
>
> Perhaps it's not that people dont care and more that they are unaware of
> those problems I mean I personally was unaware of those
removing legacy BIOS support
> from Fedora is the right thing to do.?? I don't see significant benefit,
> and I see lots of potential harm.
Considering that a custom installer for Fedora could just be a bash script
that partitions disks, then runs `dnf`, then grub2-install.. It
support for GRUB2
> / BIOS wanes to the point it can no longer stand under its own weight
> (much like 32bit install media).
GRUB2, which is a UEFI bootloader as well, is a far superior bootloader to
systemd-bloat, and it supports usecases that are supported by Anaconda (the
Fedora instal
1 - 100 of 553 matches
Mail list logo
