From: Eric Sandeen Subject: Re: GRUB and the risk of block list corruption in extX Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:38:20 -0600 Message-ID: <5119106C.2050608@redhat.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org To: Chris Murphy Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47253 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757255Ab3BKPiV (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 10:38:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2/9/13 6:17 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > On 2013-02-07 15:50:07 GMT Eric Sandeen wrote: > >> To be clear, this is only the case when installing the bootloader >> itself to a partition containing a filesystem, not when installing >> to the MBR, correct? > > Correct. > >> Which is different than saying "/boot is on ext4" - it's putting >> the bootloader itself on a partition containing a filesystem, >> something which is a bit more unusual, I think. > > Some users apparently want distribution specific boot loaders as > secondary, chain loaded from a primary boot loader that goes in the > MBR gap. > Understood, just didn't want this to turn into a "grub2 doesn't work on ext4?!" meme. :) Thanks, -Eric