On Jan 16, 2014, at 7:13 PM, joe faith <dzrdm...@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Chris Murphy
>> Sent: 01/16/14 04:04 PM
>> To: The development of GNU GRUB
>> Subject: Re: [RFC] Allow separate boot block and core.img location?
>>
>> Is there a good reason why we don't have a separate partition for core.img?
>> It doesn't seem like it's an OK idea for anything to be using the
>> unallocated MBR gap, it's essentially a free for all. So why not an 0xEA
>> partition of 1MB that's the MBR equivalent of the GPT BIOS Boot partition? I
>> don't know if it even necessarily requires use of a primary partition if the
>> boot.img code in the MBR simply points to an LBA to load. If that's the case
>> core.img could be in an extended partition. And once GRUB is running, it
>> doesn't care about primary or extended partitions anyway, right?
> When using TrueCrypt whole disk encryption, for example, extended partitions
> are not supported (with WinXP anyway).
> That leaves you with a maximum of 4 partitions - often not enough to spare
> one for grub (especially in multi-boot setups).
I must be having a problem counting:
1. GRUB
2. unencrypted "boot" for Windows/Truecrypt
3. Truecrypt encrypted "primary" for Windows
4. extended
Chris Murphy
_______________________________________________
Grub-devel mailing list
Grub-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
