On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Donald J Bindner wrote:
> I believe I (as a novice even) agree that it is not a bug. But I
> don't think the reason is being well described. To GRUB, the
> correct path to your file is _not_ /boot/boot/grub/menu.lst but
> rather (hd2,0)/boot/grub/menu.lst. This is true whether you are
> booting or running from with Linux with the GRUB shell.
I know this. the linux path is now /boot/boot/grub because of the
partition being mounted at boot. I am saying that this is inelgant for
linux users in my situation to have /boot/boot. I understand <now> that
the design of grub is not to cater to os's for the setup. All grub must
do is be a bootloader. I just think its a bit of a pain and not outwardly
obvious that people with boot partitions must have a /boot/boot in linux
to make menus work.
My reason for referring to this as a bug is because if I wrote a piece of
software that interfaced with a device type generically and someone made a
device that conforms to what I say I support and it doesn't work. That
would be a bug in my code most likely.
I am changing my view on how this problem arose to be a documentation
oversight and to ease the use of GRUB for linux users who are switching to
grub from lilo <I personally think everyone should just for the great
menus it has.
>
> The thing in the previous comments that should tip you off about
> this is where they say "GRUB doesn't care about where things are
> mounted" or something similar.
>
> That some particular path is hard-coded need not be considered a
> bug in any event. You may consider it the default path (if that
> is how it is used) for menu.lst since you have the option of
>
> If my understanding of the problem is too shallow for these
> comments to be correct and lucid, I apologize. I have not looked
> into the code, so my understanding is shallow indeed.
>
> Don
>
> --
> Don Bindner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
