Have you formatted the partition as FAT? Have you marked the partition as boot/EFI System Partition?
Also, while in theory you in can make any partition your ESP, some (bad) software will expect the ESP to always be the first partition.
>With the exceptions noted below, it is recommended to use the ext4 file system:
>If a new UEFI system partition has been created on a UEFI/GPT system, it must be formatted with a fat32 file system:
/dev/sda1 100MB FAT32 /boot EFI System Partition w/boot flag
/dev/sda2 50GB EXT4 /
/dev/sda3 188GB EXT4 /home
/dev/sda4 2GB SWAP
Adapt to your particular drive size, drive setup, multi-boot etc… setup.
Install windows first, shrink the volume then make your arch partitions but leave the boot mode on the windows boot partition. Still create the linux boot partition, just don't mark it. Then install grub to the boot partition - see wiki for all this btw - and add it to the windows boot manager.
1) Because then you can reinstall os on /, grab all packages and keep all dotfiles and shit in place on /home
2) Because it has /usr which generally takes installed software
3) No, 100MB may be just fine with proper GRUB configuration, singleboot and enough memory
Why is everything you say false?
Because bios is dumb and blindly executes binary code at a given location without understanding what it's doing.
EFI on the other hand is a little smarter and more aware of things, and thus needs to actually be able to see your boot files.
Fat is a good choice for a small volume that holds only few files and doesn't need any special features besides simply holding files.
Bios is dumb because it's configured with a fixed address that it just executes blindly. Literally anything can do that, and it's a pretty fragile, blind, abusable system.
Efi actually loads up a file hierarchy, searches for bootable files and renders them in a list so you can pick a system to boot.
If you don't understand the difference and still think
>>Because bios is dumb
>>but can do what efi can't
is a legit argument, you should kill yourself because you're retarded.
Then again, what the fuck else am I expecting from neetchan?
So this is the situation now guys. What do
Because it doesn't have a built-in module to be able to mount and read ext4. The industry decided it was not worth it, that a fat boot partition would be enough. Get over it. Do you expect them to write a module for every filesystem out there, in case ext4 isn't your thing but rather btrfs, zfs, reiser, etc etc?
When it comes to compatibility, no compatibility (i.e. only fat) is better than half-assed compatibility (some systems besides fat but not all that exist, which would be impossible to do).
FAT is strong for small partitions and good performance; EFI spec denotes that the firmware has to read FAT, as if embedded, and find the nearest bootloader image or kernel image and put it into memory. It must be mounted at /boot/efi, and flagged to boot and as EFI system partition (esp). Also I wouldn't use GRUB because of how big it is. rEFInd is a superior solution (supports boot drives with NTFS, XFS...) and it is a lot more robust. OP, being unable to even read an install handbook is honestly retarded, and proof that most arch users are probably mouth breathing primates.