On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 17:35, Marco Rebhan <[email protected]> wrote: > No, you do not need an XBOOTLDR partition with systemd-boot and in fact I have > never used one, and I'm not sure why the guide advertises it so prominently. > Good to know! Then I'm not sure why the guide is advocating for one if they're both FAT32. And, as I mentioned earlier, the Boot Loader Specification doc does suggest that it's optional, so I would have been surprised if any implementation would require the partition.
> There seems to be a lot of cargo cult around boot partitions (probably left > over from the BIOS days), you really only need the ESP. The set up I have used > for years is ESP at /boot, containing systemd-boot, kernel, initramfs and so > on, and that's it (excluding of course / and other actual system partitions). > I disagree that it's _just_ BIOS days thing. While you can, irrespective of boot loader, have all of your kernel and initrd images dumped into ESP without any functional issues and do away with a separate partition, there are benefits to the contrary. One such benefit is journaling. Unless your EFI firmware allows for a non-FAT32 ESP, then storing the kernel and initrd images will need to be on a separate partition. While data corruption during write operations on this partition, given its usage patterns, is perhaps highly improbable it's certainly not impossible. So while the benefits of a journaling system for /boot may be small, they can be a legitimate consideration. In this line of reasoning, perhaps the boot loader guide(s), particularly the one in the Handbook, are aimed at covering a partition layout that: a) is compatible between EFI and BIOS set ups (with difference being ESP); b) is consistent across boot loader choices and compatible enough if one should wish to switch from one to the other at a later point; c) allows for cases where rootfs may not be readable by a boot loader (e.g. encryption as previously mentioned); and d) offers a degree of protection from corruption on writes; while leaving the coverage various possible layout choices to those that are more familiar with what they're doing. So some of it may be baggage from BIOS days, I admin, I also would not be surprised if it was a conscious decision to reduce the complexity of a first-time set up by someone new to Gentoo. A 50+ page document, while exhaustive, certainly wouldn't classify as a "handbook" or something to use as a reference. Regards, Victor
