What is their FUCKING problem?

What is their FUCKING problem?

Attached: 1663048862125963.png (636x240, 41.29K)

Based

>ultratensai
ultra baka

>Set it to G and not M
Ultrabased. Imagine on how many old kernels you can stuff into that.

I understand Loonix does some pretty fucktarded shit to the ESP, so this neither shocking nor unexpected.

Attached: linux standards compliance.png (438x366, 41.05K)

funny, mine is 128 too, except there's a M next to it

kek, smartest Arch user

Nobody puts the kernel on the esp anymore

the kernel is an EFI executable, it makes total sense for it to be there. boot loaders are bloat

Boot partition != ESP partition.
As usual wintards criticize something they know nothing about.

If you’re using efistub your kernel literally is your bootloader, of course it would go on the EFI partition. Similarly if you’re using encryption, which everyone should be in this day and age, it makes perfect sense to put the initrd on the only partition that actually needs to be unencrypted.

I do and it's based because the rest of my partitions are encrypted.

every single time

>Similarly if you’re using encryption, which everyone should be in this day and age, it makes perfect sense to put the initrd on the only partition that actually needs to be unencrypted.
then how come windows can implement the whole disk encryption in the bootloader?

Same reason Windows can do anything better than Linux.
>BECAUSE MICROSOFT HAS LE PROPRIETARY SECRETS AND THEY USE THEM UNFAIRLY TO WRITE BETTER SOFTWARE THAN US FREETARDS

Linux can do that too, GRUB can read both LUKS and ZFS encrypted disks. It does however force you to disable a lot of features.
Features Microsoft never had to begin with because NTFS is functionally comparable to ext2, a 90s era journaling fs.

>Linux can do that too, GRUB can read both LUKS and ZFS encrypted disks. It does however force you to disable a lot of features.
Yes, of course, the freetard alternative software can do everything but it's super crippled so that's why no one uses it.
>Features Microsoft never had to begin with because NTFS is functionally comparable to ext2, a 90s era journaling fs.
1. Ext2 is not a journaling filesystem.
2. NTFS has extended attributes and alternate data streams for 20 years, which is more than you can say about Ex2 and Ex4.
3. NTFS just werks.
4. Linux has nothing as user friendly as Bitlocker.

If bitlocker was secure Russia and China wouldn’t ban it in favour of domestic Linux distros.

I do, and it's because I skip GRUB entirely and boot self-signed EFI stubs with the initramfs and arguments compiled in

/boot/efi is where bootloader resides, the partition can be 16MB.
/boot is what some people like me like to do, in case of ubuntu you need a 4GB /boot partition(because every kernel update the previous kernel image persists).

On arch with /boot (esp) I set 500MB, I have a distrust in case systemd-boot can't read the kernel from the root filesystem.
For legacy boot on gpt I just use ext4 /

You can if your bootloader supports LUKS. Last time I checked a few years back GRUB didn't support LUKS2, only LUKS. Unless you're using secure boot the bootloader is always potentially vulnerable if you're aready rooted. You can secure boot Linux but then you're back to unencrypted /boot.

You can put your /boot on a flash drive you always bring with you. It’s pretty schizo but basically the only way to be sure.

>but what if the glowies arrest me and take the drive
So what? If they’ve seized your person they could just waterboard you until you unlock all your devices for them anyway. Your secure boot 128 bit entropy whatever won’t do shit if they can just make you unlock everything.

proper secure booting could be accomplished if linux nerds would figure out how to sign initrd, 17 years after uefi became a thing