FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux General Discussion

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-18-2012, 06:40 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via
the latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).

I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc
partitions and partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition
(using MBR and NOT GPT partitioning) before the first formatted
partition on the HD and install grub2 during the base install.
However can someone please tell me explicitly if, for a system with
only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT partitioning but just plain old
MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB post-MBR gap still a
"requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to work? I can't
find that as an explicit statement in any of the documentation that I
have read for installs/grub2/partitioning! i.e. does grub2 still need
to embed the core.img file in the post-MBR gap as the preferred and
dev recommended approach in this case?

The reason I would like to have that explicit answer is that if I want
to install arch on a machine which has a pre-existing NTFS partition,
and possibly host-protected partition as well for Windows recovery, at
the start of the drive, then if the 2MiB post-MBR gap is a requirement
(rather than a nicety) for grub2 with BIOS and MBR partitioning (but
no GPT partitioning or UEFI) then unless the drive is re-partitioned
and the NTFS partition reduced in size and moved out by 2MiB then
there could be problems? However doing that partition jinking about
might itself lead to a few issues!

I am going to do an install with new partitioning on an old laptop to
check that I can successfully use the new install system (without AIF)
and hopefully that will work, but I also have other machines with
existing and important (to me) Windows partitions that I would really
like to NOT corrupt when installing arch to the partitions on their
drives.

The other reason I am asking this question is that I also have
existing dual boot laptops with Windows XP and arch with BIOS and MBR
partitioning - and at some point it would presumably be sensible to
move from the existing grub to grub2 - and on these systems where I
have already checked that there is only a 64 sector post-MBR gap -
will this lead to problems if I change from grub to grub2 if I don't
change the partitions to have a 2MiB post-MBR gap?

Thanks for any help on this - I have been doing reading and trying to
prepare without looking an idiot and being a good arch admin, but
there is quite a lot to read and I still can't find the answer to the
explicit question above!

--
mike c
 
Old 07-18-2012, 06:46 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:40 PM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via
> the latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).
>
> I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc
> partitions and partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition
> (using MBR and NOT GPT partitioning) before the first formatted
> partition on the HD and install grub2 during the base install.
> However can someone please tell me explicitly if, for a system with
> only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT partitioning but just plain old
> MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB post-MBR gap still a
> "requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to work? I can't
> find that as an explicit statement in any of the documentation that I
> have read for installs/grub2/partitioning! i.e. does grub2 still need
> to embed the core.img file in the post-MBR gap as the preferred and
> dev recommended approach in this case?
>
> The reason I would like to have that explicit answer is that if I want
> to install arch on a machine which has a pre-existing NTFS partition,
> and possibly host-protected partition as well for Windows recovery, at
> the start of the drive, then if the 2MiB post-MBR gap is a requirement
> (rather than a nicety) for grub2 with BIOS and MBR partitioning (but
> no GPT partitioning or UEFI) then unless the drive is re-partitioned
> and the NTFS partition reduced in size and moved out by 2MiB then
> there could be problems? However doing that partition jinking about
> might itself lead to a few issues!
>
> I am going to do an install with new partitioning on an old laptop to
> check that I can successfully use the new install system (without AIF)
> and hopefully that will work, but I also have other machines with
> existing and important (to me) Windows partitions that I would really
> like to NOT corrupt when installing arch to the partitions on their
> drives.
>
> The other reason I am asking this question is that I also have
> existing dual boot laptops with Windows XP and arch with BIOS and MBR
> partitioning - and at some point it would presumably be sensible to
> move from the existing grub to grub2 - and on these systems where I
> have already checked that there is only a 64 sector post-MBR gap -
> will this lead to problems if I change from grub to grub2 if I don't
> change the partitions to have a 2MiB post-MBR gap?
>
> Thanks for any help on this - I have been doing reading and trying to
> prepare without looking an idiot and being a good arch admin, but
> there is quite a lot to read and I still can't find the answer to the
> explicit question above!
>
> --
> mike c

I just realised that the current build of the netinstall isos still
have grub legacy and not grub2 - so I will wait for my first test
install - but my questions above remain keenly awaiting some replies
anyway!

Thanks

--
mike c
 
Old 07-18-2012, 07:54 PM
Matthew Monaco
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On 07/18/2012 12:46 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:40 PM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via the
>> latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).
>>
>> I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc partitions and
>> partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition (using MBR and NOT GPT
>> partitioning) before the first formatted partition on the HD and install
>> grub2 during the base install. However can someone please tell me
>> explicitly if, for a system with only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT
>> partitioning but just plain old MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB
>> post-MBR gap still a "requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to
>> work?

I use grub2 with msdos partitioning and no gap.
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:01 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 8:54 PM, Matthew Monaco <dgbaley27@0x01b.net> wrote:
> On 07/18/2012 12:46 PM, mike cloaked wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 7:40 PM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via the
>>> latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).
>>>
>>> I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc partitions and
>>> partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition (using MBR and NOT GPT
>>> partitioning) before the first formatted partition on the HD and install
>>> grub2 during the base install. However can someone please tell me
>>> explicitly if, for a system with only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT
>>> partitioning but just plain old MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB
>>> post-MBR gap still a "requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to
>>> work?
>
> I use grub2 with msdos partitioning and no gap.
>
Thank you - though I am ignorant about whether at some point in the
future the gap would be a "requirement" and whether the core.img may
get large and cause an issue - certainly I use another distro on a
server where grub2 is the bootloader with BIOS and standard
partitioning and it also has no problems at all though in that case
the core.img file is in a directory in /boot - but having seen dire
warnings on various web pages I wanted someone who knew to confirm
that grub2 in the old style BIOS and disk partitioning would continue
to work into the future or not!


--
mike c
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:13 PM
Kirill Churin
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:40 AM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via
> the latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).
>
> I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc
> partitions and partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition
> (using MBR and NOT GPT partitioning) before the first formatted
> partition on the HD and install grub2 during the base install.
> However can someone please tell me explicitly if, for a system with
> only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT partitioning but just plain old
> MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB post-MBR gap still a
> "requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to work? I can't
> find that as an explicit statement in any of the documentation that I
> have read for installs/grub2/partitioning! i.e. does grub2 still need
> to embed the core.img file in the post-MBR gap as the preferred and
> dev recommended approach in this case?
>
> The reason I would like to have that explicit answer is that if I want
> to install arch on a machine which has a pre-existing NTFS partition,
> and possibly host-protected partition as well for Windows recovery, at
> the start of the drive, then if the 2MiB post-MBR gap is a requirement
> (rather than a nicety) for grub2 with BIOS and MBR partitioning (but
> no GPT partitioning or UEFI) then unless the drive is re-partitioned
> and the NTFS partition reduced in size and moved out by 2MiB then
> there could be problems? However doing that partition jinking about
> might itself lead to a few issues!
>
> I am going to do an install with new partitioning on an old laptop to
> check that I can successfully use the new install system (without AIF)
> and hopefully that will work, but I also have other machines with
> existing and important (to me) Windows partitions that I would really
> like to NOT corrupt when installing arch to the partitions on their
> drives.
>
> The other reason I am asking this question is that I also have
> existing dual boot laptops with Windows XP and arch with BIOS and MBR
> partitioning - and at some point it would presumably be sensible to
> move from the existing grub to grub2 - and on these systems where I
> have already checked that there is only a 64 sector post-MBR gap -
> will this lead to problems if I change from grub to grub2 if I don't
> change the partitions to have a 2MiB post-MBR gap?
>
> Thanks for any help on this - I have been doing reading and trying to
> prepare without looking an idiot and being a good arch admin, but
> there is quite a lot to read and I still can't find the answer to the
> explicit question above!
>
> --
> mike c

What the fuck is wrong with you, guys? Why didn't you just read the manual?
http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#BIOS-installation

Arch follows upstream, you know?

--
Kirill Churin
Jabber: reflexing@reflexing.ru
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:42 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Kirill Churin <reflexing@reflexing.ru> wrote:

> What the fuck is wrong with you, guys? Why didn't you just read the manual?
> http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#BIOS-installation
>
> Arch follows upstream, you know?
>

Thank you for your polite reply! I have read the manual and maybe I am
just plain stupid but I could not find the answer to my question in
that link! I am aware that arch follows upstream. But grub2 as
released is new. Can you tell me in which section the answer lies -
(there is a single reference to the post-MBR gap in that link but it
implies that it should be 1MiB in general and yet grub has worked
without it forever!) That is why I asked the question related to grub2
- if that means I am regarded as a complete idiot then I will shut up
and not raise this further - maybe I am the only arch user who fails
to know how to find the answer to this question.

--
mike c
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:51 PM
Taylor Hedberg
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

mike cloaked, Wed 2012-07-18 @ 22:42:37+0100:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Kirill Churin <reflexing@reflexing.ru> wrote:
> > What the fuck is wrong with you, guys? Why didn't you just read the
> > manual?
> > http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#BIOS-installation
> >
> > Arch follows upstream, you know?
>
> Thank you for your polite reply! I have read the manual and maybe I am
> just plain stupid but I could not find the answer to my question in
> that link! I am aware that arch follows upstream. But grub2 as
> released is new. Can you tell me in which section the answer lies -
> (there is a single reference to the post-MBR gap in that link but it
> implies that it should be 1MiB in general and yet grub has worked
> without it forever!) That is why I asked the question related to grub2
> - if that means I am regarded as a complete idiot then I will shut up
> and not raise this further - maybe I am the only arch user who fails
> to know how to find the answer to this question.

Just ignore the troll. There are a few people on this list who seem to
take offense at the fact that people ask questions about Arch Linux...on
a list for asking questions about Arch Linux. It's one thing if you had
made no effort to find an answer on your own, which is admittedly
irritating, but that doesn't seem to be the case for you. So just don't
pay him any mind.
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:54 PM
Kirill Churin
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 3:42 AM, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:13 PM, Kirill Churin <reflexing@reflexing.ru> wrote:
>
>> What the fuck is wrong with you, guys? Why didn't you just read the manual?
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub.html#BIOS-installation
>>
>> Arch follows upstream, you know?
>>
>
> Thank you for your polite reply! I have read the manual and maybe I am
> just plain stupid but I could not find the answer to my question in
> that link! I am aware that arch follows upstream. But grub2 as
> released is new. Can you tell me in which section the answer lies -
> (there is a single reference to the post-MBR gap in that link but it
> implies that it should be 1MiB in general and yet grub has worked
> without it forever!) That is why I asked the question related to grub2
> - if that means I am regarded as a complete idiot then I will shut up
> and not raise this further - maybe I am the only arch user who fails
> to know how to find the answer to this question.
>
> --
> mike c

Okay, I'm really sorry me being so harsh, really. Drunk and furious,
you know? Really sorry. There're enough people complain about obvious
things like /lib movements

The answer you want only GRUB2 devs can answer (as far as I know there
not more than 2 of them). So feel free to ask on their mailing list
(upstream again).

--
Kirill Churin
Jabber: reflexing@reflexing.ru
 
Old 07-18-2012, 09:58 PM
Christian Hesse
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com> on Wed, 2012/07/18 19:40:
> I am planning a test install using the new arch-install-scripts via
> the latest netinstall images from releng (from today's date).
>
> I know that for a system where I blow away all previous disc
> partitions and partition from scratch I can create a 2MiB partition
> (using MBR and NOT GPT partitioning) before the first formatted
> partition on the HD and install grub2 during the base install.
> However can someone please tell me explicitly if, for a system with
> only BIOS (no UEFI at all), and no GPT partitioning but just plain old
> MBR partitioning - is the recommended 2MiB post-MBR gap still a
> "requirement" for that specific situation for grub2 to work? I can't
> find that as an explicit statement in any of the documentation that I
> have read for installs/grub2/partitioning! i.e. does grub2 still need
> to embed the core.img file in the post-MBR gap as the preferred and
> dev recommended approach in this case?
>
> The reason I would like to have that explicit answer is that if I want
> to install arch on a machine which has a pre-existing NTFS partition,
> and possibly host-protected partition as well for Windows recovery, at
> the start of the drive, then if the 2MiB post-MBR gap is a requirement
> (rather than a nicety) for grub2 with BIOS and MBR partitioning (but
> no GPT partitioning or UEFI) then unless the drive is re-partitioned
> and the NTFS partition reduced in size and moved out by 2MiB then
> there could be problems? However doing that partition jinking about
> might itself lead to a few issues!
>
> I am going to do an install with new partitioning on an old laptop to
> check that I can successfully use the new install system (without AIF)
> and hopefully that will work, but I also have other machines with
> existing and important (to me) Windows partitions that I would really
> like to NOT corrupt when installing arch to the partitions on their
> drives.
>
> The other reason I am asking this question is that I also have
> existing dual boot laptops with Windows XP and arch with BIOS and MBR
> partitioning - and at some point it would presumably be sensible to
> move from the existing grub to grub2 - and on these systems where I
> have already checked that there is only a 64 sector post-MBR gap -
> will this lead to problems if I change from grub to grub2 if I don't
> change the partitions to have a 2MiB post-MBR gap?
>
> Thanks for any help on this - I have been doing reading and trying to
> prepare without looking an idiot and being a good arch admin, but
> there is quite a lot to read and I still can't find the answer to the
> explicit question above!

Grub 2.x is fine with embedding its core.img into about 31kB. That is
starting sector 2 directly after the MBR and having first partition start at
sector 63. (Old disk alignment to cylinders, you should not use that -
especially with hard drives with 4k blocks or SSDs.)

However this could become a problem if core.img increases with time. I think
even the wrong compiler flags are enough to exceed the limit.

You are perfectly fine if your partitions are aligned to 1MB-Boundaries. Grub
has 1023 sectors to embed its core.img.

Having GPT partition table you need a BIOS boot partition (type EF02) that
Grub uses to embed its core.img. Note that the GPT partition table itself
starts from sector 2, so you should not write anything there!
However you should note that only Windows 7 64 Bit can boot from GPT
partition table on UEFI Hardware. Every other MS OS is out of luck. (At least
without faking anything, you could use gptsync for example.)

Hope that helps...
--
main(a){char*c=/* Schoene Gruesse */"B?IJj;MEH"
"CX:;",b;for(a/* Chris get my mail address: */=0;b=c[a++]
putchar(b-1/(/* gcc -o sig sig.c && ./sig */b/42*2-3)*42);}
 
Old 07-18-2012, 10:14 PM
mike cloaked
 
Default Quick question about post-MBR gap?

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Taylor Hedberg <tmhedberg@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just ignore the troll. There are a few people on this list who seem to
> take offense at the fact that people ask questions about Arch Linux...on
> a list for asking questions about Arch Linux. It's one thing if you had
> made no effort to find an answer on your own, which is admittedly
> irritating, but that doesn't seem to be the case for you. So just don't
> pay him any mind.

Actually the nearest I got to an answer is
https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/24103 which implies that for more
complex setups there could be a problem without the post-MBR gap in
grub2. So my best bet would indeed be to ensure that all my machines
do have the recommended first partition start point even for legacy
type partitioning (despite the potential pain in so doing) before
attempting to convert or install with grub2 when it moves to core (and
the new netinstall isos). I can foresee some users hitting issues when
grub2 becomes default.

Thanks - I won't pursue this any further on this list.

--
mike c
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:09 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org