/boot partition required?
 

Is the /boot partition still required? I recall that it was required due to linux boot loaders not being able to read past the 1024th cylinder or whatever, but have they overcome that problem?

I just installed Fedora on a system and tried it without the /boot partition on a large drive and it seems fine.:scratch:

Any details on what the "real" problem was with that, and any info on what changed would be great. I am going to do more Linux installs, and want to avoid it if possible.

Thanks!

it's not needed, but it's still a very good idea really, and you should have one. for example, you shouldn't actually mount your /boot partition as a matter of course. With those files not benig mounted when your system is running a crash of your system can not affect those files at all. they are also not used once you've booted up. it's nice and clean safety to keep it seperate. you can also then keep one /boot partition for multiple distributions.

oh and it was probably the 1024th cylinder issue that lilo used to have, whereby it could not access files more than 8.4gb into the drive. this is long long gone now, abuot 3 years ago i think it was sorted.

so, to sum up what has been said for clarity:

This problem had to do with the boot loader, and they resolved that years ago. However, it is a good idea to keep the /boot directory on it's own partition to keep it safe. Though, it's not at all required.

Thanks. I will use a seperate /boot partition for systems I plan on keeping around for a while, but I won't bother for temporary setups, or boxes I test on.

LinuxQuestions.org ..... always such helpful people.

THAT was the answer i've been looking for all day! Thanks for clearing it out :)

Now im on my way with a decent partitiontable...:cool: