Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#45029 - [syslinux] syslinux-install_update: replace sgdisk by sfdisk

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Sebastiaan Lokhorst (lonaowna) - Wednesday, 20 May 2015, 17:37 GMT
Last edited by Anatol Pomozov (anatolik) - Sunday, 28 February 2016, 17:16 GMT
Task Type General Gripe
Category Packages: Core
Status Closed
Assigned To Thomas Bächler (brain0)
Tom Gundersen (tomegun)
Anatol Pomozov (anatolik)
Architecture All
Severity Very Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

sfdisk (provided by util-linux) supports GPT-partitioned disk since a while. It is considered as good as sgdisk for most purposes[1], and it should support all operations required by the syslinux-install_update script.

So I propose to replace sgdisk by sfdisk in the script. This would be an improvement because util-linux is in base, so doesn't have to be manually installed. We could scrap it as optdepend and the checks if it is present wouldn't be necessary anymore. It might also be easier(?) to use the same tool for MBR and GPT disks in the script.

[1]https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2014-December/038001.html
This task depends upon

Closed by  Anatol Pomozov (anatolik)
Sunday, 28 February 2016, 17:16 GMT
Reason for closing:  Deferred
Comment by Dave Reisner (falconindy) - Wednesday, 20 May 2015, 17:53 GMT
Your linked mailing list post doesn't make any claims about sfdisk being "as good as sgdisk". There's been numerous bugs in sfdisk since the introduction of GPT support. I'm not actively aware of any at the moment, but it'd be lousy to replace something that works with something that doesn't always work. I would strongly suggest treading lightly here.
Comment by Sebastiaan Lokhorst (lonaowna) - Wednesday, 20 May 2015, 18:08 GMT
You are right, the mailing list thread is not completely convincing, but the general response was "there are no major problems". If there are any bugs that might possibly affect the working of this script, then I absolutely agree that we should not switch.

I just wanted to state this as an option that we maybe could investigate and have as a future target, as it is a slight improvement - if it would work bug-free. It is not something that should be rushed in any way - hence the "very low" severity. :)

Loading...