From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Tremer To: development@lists.ipfire.org Subject: Re: Another Installer bug. xfs also not work... Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2023 13:59:21 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0dae858b93c454e519d1d08529739e42417f697e.camel@ipfire.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8684807597161444042==" List-Id: --===============8684807597161444042== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I would say we simply increase the size of the partition to 512 MiB. It feels= a little bit wasteful, but there is not much else we can do if we want to co= ntinue supporting XFS. I do not think there is any benefit in mixing partition types, because with X= FS selected and VFAT being used for EFI and ext4 being used for /boot you wou= ld have a whole zoo of file systems not offering any advantage. I have no idea what the state is out there that we can finally drop the /boot= partition and systems with hard drives of several terabyte size would still = be able to boot. So for that reason, I would like to keep things as they are = and just enlarge the partition. Best, -Michael > On 5 Apr 2023, at 10:16, Stefan Schantl wrote: >=20 > Hello Arne, >=20 > thanks for having a look on this and figuring out this limitation. >> At my tests about the grub install bug i found another that is there >> since core173. >>=20 >> The install on xfs filesystem fails because xfsprogs refuse to create >> filesystems smaller than 300MB. >>=20 >> https://bugzilla.ipfire.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D13077 >>=20 >> there are three possible solutions: >> 1. add "-unsupported" flag to ignore this limit (not sure if this a >> good=20 >> idea >> because we had strange out of space reports in the past also if >> no=20 >> additional filles >> are installed.) >=20 > The will have their reasons, why the developers choosed 300 MB as > minimum file system size. Even there is this flag to bypass that, may > there as you already mentioned unexpected side effects. >=20 >>=20 >> 2. enlarge boot partition >=20 > This would be a good idea, because the kernel size grows up from > release to release and if there are strange out of space problems in > the past would solve them too. Enlarge to for example 512MB would solve > both issues at once. >=20 > Are there any problems to expect for small installations on very > limited storage space (SD-cards etc.) ? >=20 >>=20 >> 3. switch boot partition to ext4 >=20 > This would bypass the XFS limitation but would result in a kind of > very fragmented filesystem types. EFI would be vfat, boot ext4 and if > selected the main file systemd XFS. >=20 > I would no expect any troubles when doing this but for me it tastes a > bit dizzy and unclean. >=20 >>=20 >> Which is the best solution? >=20 > In theory there would be a fourth option: >=20 > 4. Drop the option to select XFS during setup and force the usage of > ext4.... >=20 >>=20 >> Arne >=20 > Best regards, >=20 > -Stefan --===============8684807597161444042==--