[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B7A42EB.3070405@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:02:03 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: david@...g.hm
CC: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>, Michael Evans <mjevans1983@...il.com>,
Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>,
linux-raid@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Linux mdadm superblock question.
On 02/15/2010 07:18 PM, david@...g.hm wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>> On 02/15/2010 04:27 PM, Neil Brown wrote:
>>
>> There are three options:
>>
>> a) either don't boot from it (separate /boot);
>> b) use a bootloader which installs in the MBR and
>> hopefully-unpartitioned disk areas (e.g. Grub);
>> c) use a nonstandard custom MBR.
>>
>> Neither (b) or (c), of course, allow for chainloading from another OS
>> install and thus are bad for interoperability.
>
> I have had no problems with XFS partitions and lilo as the bootloader.
> I've been doing this for a couple of years now without realizing that
> there is supposed to be a problem.
>
LILO also can be stuffed in the MBR (and then uses block-pointers from
there). There is one more option that I didn't mention, which is to put
the bootloader of a separate partition, OS/2 style. Again, breaks the
standard chainloading model.
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists