On 06/21/2012 10:05 AM, Goffredo Baroncelli wrote: > On 06/21/2012 03:38 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> But if /boot has to be in a separate filesystem, which is the point to >>>> support btrfs at all ? Does make sense to support only a subset of btrfs >>>> features ? >>>> >> Yes, and that's another good reason for /boot: btrfs supports that kind >> of policy (e.g. "no compression or encryption in this subtree.") > > But what about large disk ? Syslinux is able to handle large disk ? Or > it uses BIOS interrupt? It uses the firmware.. how well the firmware can handle large disks is another matter. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
