On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Mauro Santos
wrote:
> On 19-05-2016 00:20, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
>> Could we use a prefix convention to order our hooks? It's usefull to build
>> modules before building initramfs and eventually run grub update at the end.
>
> Not sure triggering grub update
On 19.05.2016 22:24, Carsten Mattner wrote:
>> I'd guess everyone that maintains their own grub.cfg would really
>> appreciate not having a bad surprise after a kernel update.
But as a sysadmin I can configure my own hooks in /etc/hooks, right? So,
I could optionally add a hook which upates grub.
On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Mauro Santos
wrote:
> On 19-05-2016 00:20, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
>> Could we use a prefix convention to order our hooks? It's usefull to build
>> modules before building initramfs and eventually run grub update at the end.
>
> Not sure triggering grub update
On 19-05-2016 13:33, Doug Newgard wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2016 13:13:51 +0100
> Mauro Santos wrote:
>
>> On 19-05-2016 00:20, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
>>> Could we use a prefix convention to order our hooks? It's usefull to build
>>> modules before building initramfs and eventually run grub up
On Thu, 19 May 2016 13:13:51 +0100
Mauro Santos wrote:
> On 19-05-2016 00:20, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
> > Could we use a prefix convention to order our hooks? It's usefull to build
> > modules before building initramfs and eventually run grub update at the
> > end.
>
> Not sure triggering
On 19-05-2016 00:20, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
> Could we use a prefix convention to order our hooks? It's usefull to build
> modules before building initramfs and eventually run grub update at the end.
Not sure triggering grub update automagically is a good idea, I maintain
grub.cfg myself and
6 matches
Mail list logo
