On Feb 14, 2012 1:41 PM, "LK" <linuxrocksrul...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 120214, at 19:24, m...@trausch.us wrote:
> > On 02/14/2012 01:08 PM, LK wrote:
> >> BTW: So is grub0 still supported by gentoo / maintained by themselves?
> >> Does that matter(it is boot, no network stuff) ?
> > GRUB Legacy (that is, GRUB versions 0.xx) is still the default in
> > Gentoo. In order to use GRUB 2 (that is, GRUB version 1.99 in Portage)
> > you'll have to unmask sys-boot/grub-1.99-r2.
> The thing is, IMO grub0 is better / simplier.
>
> > GRUB 2 is significantly more convenient and powerful and does not
> > require the nearly 80 patches that the legacy version does in order to
> > work properly on the system. It can also manage its own configuration
> > file using its new grub-mkconfig (grub2-mkconfig in Gentoo) program,
> > which supports the use of scripts/programs to generate grub.cfg entries
> > for booting the kernel and other operating systems.
> As you read above, I prefer grub0.* because it has config files, not
> commands which will automize it. For ubuntu I can understand that,
> but configuring boot is too simple to require automisation. When
> now automatic script fails, is there a way to do it by hand? Ubuntu
> disallows editing it by hand. Now I am confused by the 80 patches
> for legacy grub =( afaik.
>
> PS: If you know how to get rid of any background image, could you
> say how?
>
> THX + TIA.
>
>
Yes, you can edit the grub2 boot config files by hand, I do this myself in
Gentoo (and the last time I used Ubuntu you could still edit them, but that
was a while ago). You're not tied to the automation. I prefer grub2
config files, personally. Definitely not as "simple," of course, but that
hardly makes a difference to me.
