Re: What to expect following major update
Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com writes: How does the system boot up if /boot is not mounted? You don't need /boot mounted in order to boot. It only needs to be mounted in order to be updated. Booting happens before the operating system is loaded and so those files are not needed at operating system time. By the time the operating system is running there is no longer any need to access those files. [...] Your response was to Wayne but I'd like to thank your for a nice walk thru of the early stages of bootup. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ipm7auqz@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
On 11/26/2011 08:17 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: Bob Proulxb...@proulx.com writes: How does the system boot up if /boot is not mounted? You don't need /boot mounted in order to boot. It only needs to be mounted in order to be updated. Booting happens before the operating system is loaded and so those files are not needed at operating system time. By the time the operating system is running there is no longer any need to access those files. [...] Your response was to Wayne but I'd like to thank your for a nice walk thru of the early stages of bootup. As would I as well. I have never looked into how boot up worked Thanks Bob for the very useful, as well as understandable, lesson. Wayne -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ed0f5c7.3020...@gmail.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Camaleón wrote: If the package is installed and the config file needs to be updated the upgrade routine uses to ask what to do (keep the old file, compare both, replace it with the nre one...). If the partition where the file lies is not mounted then it's up to the admin user what to do. Harry responded: Yes, all that happened. I finally said OK to the new one since I had never edited the old one, I figured a new default would be ok too. Brian wrote: It would be very surprising if it had happened because grub.cfg is a file generated by update-grub, not one which is supplied by the grub-pc package. update-grub is run during an install when, for example, you get a new kernel. I'm not sure what you are saying above. By now it doesn't much matter. If you are saying it did NOT happen, you are wrong. And further you indicate the only places this might occur is during an install or a kernel change. Wrong again. This was an update which has been mentioned from the very start. In another post you say,(paraphrasing) why should a pkg care if something is mounted, it did its job. Wrong again. Its job was to update grub2. Putting files somewhere they cannot possibly be used does not do that.. So no, it did not do its job. You may argue I did not do my job,,, I can only say `Guilty as charged'. Again I mention, many software pkgs, give warnings about various things even though they SHOULD be seen to by the system admin, precisely to keep that admin from shooting him/her self in the foot. I've suggested this could be another such case. Perhaps, were a warning of some sort included, I might have stopped and `done my job'. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87sjlccoct@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
On Fri 25 Nov 2011 at 07:40:02 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: Camaleón wrote: If the package is installed and the config file needs to be updated the upgrade routine uses to ask what to do (keep the old file, compare both, replace it with the nre one...). If the partition where the file lies is not mounted then it's up to the admin user what to do. Harry responded: Yes, all that happened. I finally said OK to the new one since I had never edited the old one, I figured a new default would be ok too. Brian wrote: It would be very surprising if it had happened because grub.cfg is a file generated by update-grub, not one which is supplied by the grub-pc package. update-grub is run during an install when, for example, you get a new kernel. I'm not sure what you are saying above. By now it doesn't much matter. If you are saying it did NOT happen, you are wrong. And further you indicate the only places this might occur is during an install or a kernel change. Wrong again. This was an update which has been mentioned from the very start. During the install/update/upgrade/replacement of some GRUB packages dpkg came up with something like this? Configuration file `/boot/grub/grub.cfg' == Modified (by you or by a script) since installation. == Package distributor has shipped an updated version. What would you like to do about it ? Your options are: Y or I : install the package maintainer's version N or O : keep your currently-installed version D : show the differences between the versions Z : start a shell to examine the situation The default action is to keep your current version. *** grub.cfg (Y/I/N/O/D/Z) [default=N] ? My surprise is now mingled with considerable bewilderment because 1. This screen can be produced when the file is a conffile. grub.cfg isn't such a file. 2. If an existing conffile has not been altered it would silently be replaced by the package file. 3. None of grub-common, grub2-common, grub-pc and grub-pc-bin contain a grub.cfg. So no updated version to ship. 4, I've installed an up-to-date grub-pc to a Sid machine not 30 minutes ago. A new grub.cfg was *generated* using files in /etc/default and /etc/grub.d. No asking, either. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2025175034.GH3655@desktop
Re: What to expect following major update
On 11/24/2011 08:12 PM, Brian wrote:
On Thu 24 Nov 2011 at 09:41:12 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote:
2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot
is not mounted.
A file can be written to any directory, mounted or not. No bug here.
Seems like if the routine notices (which it does)
that those files are absent, should there not be further code to
check for boot being mounted?
I imagine GRUB could not put any files in /boot/grub because it did not
exist at the time the attempted install took place. If it had existed
the files would have appeared there. Directories are for putting files
in. Why should the package care whether it is mounted? You care, of
course - so you need to do something about it.
It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created
on an empty boot. Not during an update.
Not unless update-grub is run. Then /boot/grub will be created and
grub.cfg put in it.
I have only been using Debian since 1993, 18 years, and do not recall
ever having boot 'not' mounted. This is on syatems where I had boot on
a separate partition and, currently, everything on one partition.
Back then, and currently, vmlinunz was/is in / and linked to
/boot/vmlinuz-{kernel-version}. How does the system boot up if /boot is
not mounted?
I must be missing something or I am getting too old to realize that
Debian is doing magic tricks to confuse me, more then I already am,
after reading this thread.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ed009bd.5030...@gmail.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Harry Putnam wrote: I haven't kept boot mounted for yrs, and I hadn't noticed that grub was to be updated... there was 187 pgks, further its not automatically apparent that grub.cfg resides on boot... not all of grubs files do. I'm very new to grub2. But even with that, yes, it was sloppy not to catch it, but isn't that just the kind of place where a warning of some kind might be well placed. It is okay if you want to keep your /boot not mounted and only mount it when needed. That's fine. But I think it is your responsibililty to do it that way if that is what you want to do. There are an infinite number of possible local customizations. Your local customization to keep /boot not mounted is simply one of an infinite number of local customizations that might cause problems. It isn't possible for any package to handle an infinite number of possibilies. They are only expected to handle normal systems. Therefore if you are doing that type of special thing then I think it is your responsibilty to own that problem entirely and make sure it is mounted when the package scripts need it. This is just the same as keeping / read-only most of the time and enabling it only during installation. You could probably benefit from the dpkg configuration to automatically mount and umount /boot as needed. http://wiki.debian.org/ReadonlyRoot Look for Make apt-get remount / if needed for the configuration there and it should be simple to adapt it for your /boot needs. I think the number of users who keep a read-only / is probably larger in number than the ones who don't mount /boot so I would queue up behind the read-only root folks. If they ever get those changes into a standard system installation then you could start pushing to have an empty /boot into the next set of changes. :-) After all, its nearly a sure bet that if there are no files in /boot, it is not mounted, that is, on a running OS doing an online update. Many many linux users keep boot umounted. In fact I believe there was a time when it was common on debian. I'm pretty sure last time I played with debian, which would have been 5-7 yrs ago it was recommended. Hey, I will recommend a read-only root for all of those same reasons of safety and cleanliness and so forth. Go for it! :-) But that doesn't make it the mainstream system. At least not yet. Perhaps in time. Until then you have to know what you are doing. Bob signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: What to expect following major update
Wayne Topa linux...@gmail.com writes:
[...]
I have only been using Debian since 1993, 18 years, and do not recall
ever having boot 'not' mounted. This is on syatems where I had boot
on a separate partition and, currently, everything on one partition.
I'll defer here. As I mentioned... I only tinkered with Debian a few
yrs back so my impressions would be very limited and further, might
not have even been related to debian since I tinkered with several.
I did make clear that it was an impression.. only.
Back then, and currently, vmlinunz was/is in / and linked to
/boot/vmlinuz-{kernel-version}. How does the system boot up if /boot
is not mounted?
I'm not sure what the mechanism is but I do know for sure I boot very
often without boot mounted and with no vmlinuz in /
I've done so on Debian since I started using debian a month or so ago,
and for years when I used gentoo.
I must be missing something or I am getting too old to realize that
Debian is doing magic tricks to confuse me, more then I already am,
after reading this thread.
Far as I know, boot does not have to be mounted to do its work.
My fstab (lightly edited to prevent wrapping):
proc/proc procdefaults 0 0
# / was on /dev/sda3 during installation
UUID=83a94f1d-e6e6-432e-86ad-b24754755fff / ext4 errors=remount-ro 0 1
# /boot was on /dev/sda1 during installation
UUID=cb58784c-a2dc-48ea-89f6-d5bb2850205c /boot ext2 noauto,defaults 0 2
# swap was on /dev/sda2 during installation
UUID=b179f468-a55e-4157-9961-e3bc9324ace8 none swap sw 0 0
/dev/sdb3 /bk reiserfs noatime 0 2
/dev/sdb5 /anex reiserfs noatime 0 2
/dev/sdb6 /anex2 reiserfs noatime 0 2
[...]
Note the `noauto' for /boot
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87r50vbplv@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Bob Proulx b...@proulx.com writes: But even with that, yes, it was sloppy not to catch it, but isn't that just the kind of place where a warning of some kind might be well placed. It is okay if you want to keep your /boot not mounted and only mount it when needed. That's fine. But I think it is your responsibililty to do it that way if that is what you want to do. There are an infinite number of possible local customizations. Your local customization to keep /boot not mounted is simply one of an infinite number of local customizations that might cause problems. It isn't possible for any package to handle an infinite number of possibilies. They are only expected to handle normal systems. Therefore if you are doing that type of special thing then I think it is your responsibilty to own that problem entirely and make sure it is mounted when the package scripts need it. I think you just convinced me that its not a good plan to start with the warnings... like you point out... where would it end. I guess I just got caught out being dead headed, and there is really no cure for that, other than to pay attention. Had I noticed that grub was going to get updated then I would have knew to mount it. As it was I didn't really scroll down thru all the updates (I did this particular one in the gui updater tool). There were 187 of them and I was too lazy... Well, as always laziness has consequences. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87mxbjbp5k@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Wayne Topa wrote: How does the system boot up if /boot is not mounted? You don't need /boot mounted in order to boot. It only needs to be mounted in order to be updated. Booting happens before the operating system is loaded and so those files are not needed at operating system time. By the time the operating system is running there is no longer any need to access those files. The classic system uses the BIOS to load the MBR (main boot record). (I say classic system uses the BIOS because with very large drives and secure booting the world is changing there.) Assuming GRUB for the boot loader then GRUB will install itself into the MBR. The BIOS loads the MBR and jumps into it which jumps into GRUB. Grub reads the kernel and initrd file from /boot itself. Since this is before the Linux kernel starts it isn't mounted in that system. GRUB loads /boot itself into its own memory which is completely separate from the later Linux booted memory. The /boot/initrd.img image is a small ram disk image. It contains the drivers needed for the kernel to boot the rest of the system. It starts up init as process 1 and then proceeds with the boot. Because GRUB loaded the /boot/initrd.img and /boot/vmlinuz itself those files were not needed to be mounted and available later. Bob signature.asc Description: Digital signature
What to expect following major update
Running wheezy My updates were held up for a few days because of a problem involving backuppc not uninstalling properly... now solved. So now I've ran the update gui. During this update 187 pkgs were involved. One of them was gcc-4.6. So I now have 4.5 and 4.6 installed. I noticed that a new grub.cfg was installed, even though boot was not mounted. Another thing that happened is that /etc/resolv.conf was overwritten which took me offline with no ability to resolve. So, three things: 1) Do I need to do anything special about the upgrade in compiler? 2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot is not mounted. Seems like if the routine notices (which it does) that those files are absent, should there not be further code to check for boot being mounted? It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created on an empty boot. Not during an update. 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug I pulled out an old backup with the right stuff in it and overwrote /etc/resolv.conf. I then proceeded to make the file imutable with chattr -i. Am I likely to run into problems with /etc/resolv.conf set immutable? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87aa7ledev@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
On 11/24/2011 04:41 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Running wheezy My updates were held up for a few days because of a problem involving backuppc not uninstalling properly... now solved. So now I've ran the update gui. During this update 187 pkgs were involved. One of them was gcc-4.6. So I now have 4.5 and 4.6 installed. I noticed that a new grub.cfg was installed, even though boot was not mounted. Another thing that happened is that /etc/resolv.conf was overwritten which took me offline with no ability to resolve. So, three things: 1) Do I need to do anything special about the upgrade in compiler? No . 2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot is not mounted. Seems like if the routine notices (which it does) that those files are absent, should there not be further code to check for boot being mounted? It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created on an empty boot. Not during an update. Can't really imagine why /boot shouldn't be mounted .. of course it is possible , but upgrading grub without having /boot mounted sounds for me like shooting himself in the leg . 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug Could you check that you don't have resolvconf installed ? if yes than you should configure it or remove ... I pulled out an old backup with the right stuff in it and overwrote /etc/resolv.conf. I then proceeded to make the file imutable with chattr -i. Am I likely to run into problems with /etc/resolv.conf set immutable? Regards , Alex -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4ece6e15.8040...@biotec.tu-dresden.de
Re: What to expect following major update
On Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:41:12 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: (...) So, three things: 1) Do I need to do anything special about the upgrade in compiler? No unless you need a specific gcc version to compile a package with such requirements. 2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot is not mounted. Seems like if the routine notices (which it does) that those files are absent, should there not be further code to check for boot being mounted? It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created on an empty boot. Not during an update. If the package is installed and the config file needs to be updated the upgrade routine uses to ask what to do (keep the old file, compare both, replace it with the nre one...). If the partition where the file lies is not mounted then it's up to the admin user what to do. 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug You mean it changed its content without asking in the middle of the upgrade? That sounds risky :-? I pulled out an old backup with the right stuff in it and overwrote /etc/resolv.conf. I then proceeded to make the file imutable with chattr -i. Am I likely to run into problems with /etc/resolv.conf set immutable? If the file does not exist the system can still query another sources to lookup for the DNS servers, so I guess setting this won't hurt unless you are using NM or other routine that need to be able to edit the file. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.11.24.16.31...@gmail.com
Re: What to expect following major update
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 09:41:12AM -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug I pulled out an old backup with the right stuff in it and overwrote /etc/resolv.conf. I then proceeded to make the file imutable with chattr -i. Am I likely to run into problems with /etc/resolv.conf set immutable? to set immutable, i think you should use chattr +i /Jeffrin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2024170156.ga2...@debian.jeff
Re: What to expect following major update
On Thu 24 Nov 2011 at 09:41:12 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: Running wheezy My updates were held up for a few days because of a problem involving backuppc not uninstalling properly... now solved. So now I've ran the update gui. During this update 187 pkgs were involved. One of them was gcc-4.6. So I now have 4.5 and 4.6 installed. I noticed that a new grub.cfg was installed, even though boot was not mounted. How did you notice and what leads you to believe /boot (it's a separate partion, not part of /?) was not mounted during the upgrade? Another thing that happened is that /etc/resolv.conf was overwritten which took me offline with no ability to resolve. What was there before and after? Editting /etc/resolv.conf should have brought you back online again. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2024170412.GC3655@desktop
Re: What to expect following major update
Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes: 2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot is not mounted. Seems like if the routine notices (which it does) that those files are absent, should there not be further code to check for boot being mounted? It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created on an empty boot. Not during an update. If the package is installed and the config file needs to be updated the upgrade routine uses to ask what to do (keep the old file, compare both, replace it with the nre one...). If the partition where the file lies is not mounted then it's up to the admin user what to do. Yes, all that happened. I finally said OK to the new one since I had never edited the old one, I figured a new default would be ok too. But about boot not being mounted... well yes, it was my doing. Old habits die hard. In the gentoo world, where I came from keeping boot unmounted is a common practice... it once was on debian too. Some yrs ago when I fiddled with debian it was quite common and I'm pretty sure was recommended even. Some say it is more secure that way. And since Its easily done then seem like a net gain. Being new to grub2 I wasn't fully aware the grub.cfg resided on boot. Some of the config files for grub do not. Or at least that is so on ubuntu where I stopped awhile before coming to debian. So I didn't automatically think about mounting boot. But also much of an update happens more or less unseen so I wasn't watching that closely either. For example, I hadn't noticed that grub was to be upgraded. But even while that duty (mounting boot) may be seen as an admin chore, still there should be some warning or the like... no? I mean it seems like it would be seen as a problem and unexpected, to find boot utterly empty on an upgrade, that is a running OS, UNLESS it was umounted, and in that case its clearly not smart to write new files to the mount point. 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug You mean it changed its content without asking in the middle of the upgrade? That sounds risky :-? Not in the middle no. More like at or near the end. There was never any warning about not being able to download pkgs, When I first tried to mail the OP of this thread is when I noticed I was off line. That was shortly after the update had finished. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/8762i9dvc0@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Alex Mestiashvili a...@biotec.tu-dresden.de writes: 3) About etc resolv.conf being rendered useless during update: That two seems like it should be bug Could you check that you don't have resolvconf installed ? if yes than you should configure it or remove ... I pulled out an old backup with the right stuff in it and overwrote /etc/resolv.conf. I then proceeded to make the file imutable with chattr -i. ^+i Yes there is a directory with that name and several files in it... what is that stuff? And look at this: aptitude search resolvconf p resolvconf - name server information handler Its not installed and I've never installed it, and yet I have the directory with files inside. I created a handmade /etc/resolv.conf, shortly after installing debian. I get an IP thru dhcp... maybe that is whats going on? It was overwritten once before and I rewrote it. That was some time back. Far as I know it has worked ever since. Through quite a few smaller updates. Todays' was rather a large one (187 pkgs) Several update rounds had been backed up due to lingering problems getting rid of backuppc.. which was interfering with updates. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/871usxduvg@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
Alex Mestiashvili a...@biotec.tu-dresden.de writes: Can't really imagine why /boot shouldn't be mounted .. of course it is possible , but upgrading grub without having /boot mounted sounds for me like shooting himself in the leg . I haven't kept boot mounted for yrs, and I hadn't noticed that grub was to be updated... there was 187 pgks, further its not automatically apparent that grub.cfg resides on boot... not all of grubs files do. I'm very new to grub2. But even with that, yes, it was sloppy not to catch it, but isn't that just the kind of place where a warning of some kind might be well placed. After all, its nearly a sure bet that if there are no files in /boot, it is not mounted, that is, on a running OS doing an online update. Many many linux users keep boot umounted. In fact I believe there was a time when it was common on debian. I'm pretty sure last time I played with debian, which would have been 5-7 yrs ago it was recommended. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87wrapcfz6@newsguy.com
Re: What to expect following major update
On Thu 24 Nov 2011 at 16:11:43 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: Camaleón noela...@gmail.com writes: If the package is installed and the config file needs to be updated the upgrade routine uses to ask what to do (keep the old file, compare both, replace it with the nre one...). If the partition where the file lies is not mounted then it's up to the admin user what to do. Yes, all that happened. I finally said OK to the new one since I had never edited the old one, I figured a new default would be ok too. It would be very surprising if it had happened because grub.cfg is a file generated by update-grub, not one which is supplied by the grub-pc package. update-grub is run during an install when, for example, you get a new kernel. But about boot not being mounted... well yes, it was my doing. Old habits die hard. In the gentoo world, where I came from keeping boot unmounted is a common practice... it once was on debian too. Some yrs ago when I fiddled with debian it was quite common and I'm pretty sure was recommended even. grub-install writes grub.cfg to the directory /boot/grub. /boot is normally mounted on /dev/sdX. Yours wasn't - but grub-install still did its job, creating the grub directory if it was necessary. This grub.cfg is useless to you. When GRUB boots, it uses the files on /dev/sdX - but your newly generated grub.cfg is not on /dev/sdX. Being new to grub2 I wasn't fully aware the grub.cfg resided on boot. Some of the config files for grub do not. Or at least that is so on ubuntu where I stopped awhile before coming to debian. grub.cfg doesn't reside on /boot, it resides on /dev/sdX. If you mount /boot on /dev/sdX you'll see it there. You'll also see all the other files GRUB can use to get the machine booted. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2025004114.GF3655@desktop
Re: What to expect following major update
On Thu 24 Nov 2011 at 09:41:12 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: 2) Should it be considered a bug that grub files are written when boot is not mounted. A file can be written to any directory, mounted or not. No bug here. Seems like if the routine notices (which it does) that those files are absent, should there not be further code to check for boot being mounted? I imagine GRUB could not put any files in /boot/grub because it did not exist at the time the attempted install took place. If it had existed the files would have appeared there. Directories are for putting files in. Why should the package care whether it is mounted? You care, of course - so you need to do something about it. It seems it should not be possible for `/boot/grub' to be created on an empty boot. Not during an update. Not unless update-grub is run. Then /boot/grub will be created and grub.cfg put in it. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/2025011232.GG3655@desktop
