Bug#597799: installation-report: GPT related issues
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 08:26:33AM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:28:45PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 03:39:08PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > > The disk is a new one, though I didn't check if there was a
> > > pre-existing partitioning (but I really doubt it). OTOH, the disk is
> > > 2000GB, which is not quite over 2TB, but close enough that it may have
> > > mattered.
> >
> > Certainly MBR partitions do not work when you pass 2TB (2^32 512byte
> > sectors). After all if it had a partition table already, it would have
> > just used it.
>
> Well, 2000GB should still work with MBR partitions.
>
> > Now so far I have been running a few machines with GPT partitions on a
> > 2.5TB raid for a few years and with grub2 it works just fine, even with
> > a machine that just uses a plain old BIOS.
>
> The point is, grub just works, if I don't forget to create a small boot
> partition, which I didn't know I had to create until grub-setup failed
> because of the lack of it.
Well I have a machine that has been running for a few years now with:
50GB /
2200GB LVM
Grub2 has no problem with that, and it has a GPT partition table.
debian:~# parted
GNU Parted 1.8.8
Using /dev/sda
Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands.
(parted) print
Model: ServeRA MAIN (scsi)
Disk /dev/sda: 2250GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: gpt
Number Start End Size File system Name Flags
1 17.4kB 50.0GB 50.0GB ext3 Root boot
2 50.0GB 2250GB 2200GB LVM lvm
(parted) quit
debian:~# fdisk -l
WARNING: GPT (GUID Partition Table) detected on '/dev/sda'! The util fdisk doesn't support GPT. Use GNU Parted.
Disk /dev/sda: 2250.1 GB, 2250128752640 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 273562 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x00000000
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/sda1 1 267350 2147483647+ ee EFI GPT
So I would say there is no requirement for a /boot partition. There might
be a requirement for /boot to not be on LVM. Not sure.
--
Len Sorensen
Reply to: