On 07/25/2012 11:24 PM, Adrian Alves wrote:
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com
mailto:li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote:
To change your default option, just edit /etc/default/grub and set
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 2:03 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.comwrote:
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote:
To change your default option, just edit /etc/default/grub and set
GRUB_DEFAULT to match the label or entry number or saved.
grub2-mkconfig will respect that
2012/6/20 Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com:
While I like the current GRUB2 behavior in F17 vastly better than F16, I
kinda wonder if it makes sense to change the default behavior to save last
chosen option and by default use that the next time around, rather than
always defaulting to
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Adam Williamson awill...@redhat.comwrote:
As I understood it, the latest version of the proposal involves having
grubby simply call grub2-mkconfig when it is dealing with grub2. So the
rest of the 'stack' doesn't change at all.
Well, my proposal is basically
On Jun 21, 2012, at 12:42 AM, Juan Orti Alcaine wrote:
To change your default option, just edit /etc/default/grub and set
GRUB_DEFAULT to match the label or entry number or saved.
grub2-mkconfig will respect that decision (or it did, the last time I
used it)
No I mean for the default
Hi,
Which is one of a number of reasons why I then suggested that instead of
replacing grubby entirely, we could simply patch grubby to call
grub2-mkconfig if the bootloader is grub2. That would accomplish everything
I wanted to achieve (compliance with /etc/grub.d and /etc/default/grub,
So, ...
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
eventually break the advanced menu entries, as well as totally
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 6:36 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Jesse Keating jkeat...@j2solutions.net wrote:
On 06/19/2012 04:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.06.2012 09:53, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just
On 06/19/2012 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 23:28 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
So far, the only actual arguments against this (specifically, the
above solution to the problem) I've heard is that it breaks being able
to configure /boot/grub2/grub.cfg by hand. But that's
Am 20.06.2012 14:33, schrieb Joel Rees:
A) continue using grub1 and continue working with diminishing resources to
keep grub1 working in the new environments a boot loader will be needed in.
B) consume what upstream gives us in the form of grub2.
C) Maintain grub1 ourselves (not that I'm
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
I think what's actually needed is a small patch to grubby to make it keep
track of the bounding block the current default is in and add the new
bounding block there, so that we don't accidentally change the cosmetic
On 06/20/2012 11:04 AM, Ben Rosser wrote:
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com
mailto:pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
I think what's actually needed is a small patch to grubby to make it keep
track of the bounding block the current default is in and add the new
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 09:21 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On 06/19/2012 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 23:28 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
So far, the only actual arguments against this (specifically, the
above solution to the problem) I've heard is that it breaks being
On 06/20/2012 12:42 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 09:21 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On 06/19/2012 11:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 23:28 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
So far, the only actual arguments against this (specifically, the
above solution to the
On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 21:33 +0900, Joel Rees wrote:
You seem to think we, the Fedora project, have any sort of sway as to how
things get written in their various upstreams. We don't, except for very
few cases. Our choices here with grub2 are
A) continue using grub1 and continue
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 09:59:33AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
Well, someone already pointed to
http://people.freedesktop.org/~kay/loader/ , which seems intriguing. I
haven't read anything Kay's said publicly about it, though. Of course,
it's UEFI-specific.
Which is a good reason for it
would fixing this also fix the bug where installing a new kernel changes
the default boot OS even when the default is non Linux?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On 06/20/2012 01:32 PM, Naheem Zaffar wrote:
would fixing this also fix the bug where installing a new kernel changes the
default boot OS even when the default is non Linux?
What's the bugzilla number for that?
--
Peter
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Jun 19, 2012, at 9:57 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
grub2-mkconfig is inherently a more 'destructive' operation than grubby,
is really my only thought. But I wouldn't mind the change much at all.
pjones' opinion would be the most valuable to have, I guess.
FWIW, grub-mkconfig writes out a
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
much better wheels and leave us behind.
Abstracting for the sake of discussion from the particular case of grub2
could
Am 19.06.2012 09:53, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
much better wheels and leave us behind.
Abstracting for the sake of discussion
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:32 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 19.06.2012 09:53, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
On Jun 19, 2012, at 5:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
but it is NIT better
it is a config full of crap and script-code
You're about 6 years too late. All upstream EFI support is going into GRUB 2.
Red Hat has kept GRUB legacy on life support, and that plug is going to be
pulled sooner than
On 06/19/2012 04:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.06.2012 09:53, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
much better wheels and leave us
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Jesse Keating
jkeat...@j2solutions.net wrote:
On 06/19/2012 04:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 19.06.2012 09:53, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:41 PM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 10:44:00AM -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jun 19, 2012, at 5:32 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
but it is NIT better
it is a config full of crap and script-code
You're about 6 years too late. All upstream EFI support is going into GRUB 2.
Red Hat has kept GRUB legacy
On 06/19/2012 05:49 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
You seem to be advocating for option C) throw up your hands and yell
THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE, and then what?
[1] =)
JBG
1. http://people.freedesktop.org/~kay/loader/
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
F18 is already using grub2 for EFI. I think we can remove grub-legacy
now.
What about the Fedora images for Amazon EC2? I seem to recall that
because of pvgrub use they can't use grub2 yet. (I don't claim to be
an
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:12:06PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
F18 is already using grub2 for EFI. I think we can remove grub-legacy
now.
What about the Fedora images for Amazon EC2? I seem to recall that
because
On 06/19/2012 08:36 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 02:12:06PM -0400, Jared K. Smith wrote:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Matthew Garrett mj...@srcf.ucam.org wrote:
F18 is already using grub2 for EFI. I think we can remove grub-legacy
now.
What about the Fedora images
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 08:54:59PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
pvgrub peeks into the guest disk so it needs to understand the partition
table, the filesystem and the grub config file in the guest. Initially it
didn't handle things like ext4, grub2 and EFI but AFAIK these should be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:11:20 +0100
Matthew Garrett m...@redhat.com escribió:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 08:54:59PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
pvgrub peeks into the guest disk so it needs to understand the
partition table, the filesystem
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
pvgrub peeks into the guest disk so it needs to understand the partition
table, the filesystem and the grub config file in the guest. Initially it
didn't handle things like ext4, grub2 and EFI but AFAIK these should be
fine now. I'm not sure
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Dennis Gilmore den...@ausil.us wrote:
El Tue, 19 Jun 2012 20:11:20 +0100
Matthew Garrett m...@redhat.com escribió:
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 08:54:59PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
pvgrub peeks into the guest disk so it needs to understand the
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Garrett Holmstrom gho...@fedoraproject.org
wrote:
Like I mentioned two days ago, the only thing that matters for EC2
images is that the kernel post-install scripts continue to be capable
of updating grub configuration files, which means that wholesale
On Tue, 2012-06-19 at 23:28 -0400, Ben Rosser wrote:
So far, the only actual arguments against this (specifically, the
above solution to the problem) I've heard is that it breaks being able
to configure /boot/grub2/grub.cfg by hand. But that's the idea behind
grub2, for better or worse. The
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 17/06/12 20:15, drago01 wrote:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
Yes, and there are places where we should.
No.
That is to stop reinventing the wheel.
This would just result into stagnation while
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
eventually break the advanced menu entries, as well as totally departing
from any user customization of /etc/default/grub.
… vs. grub2-mkconfig, which totally departs from any user customization in
Ben Rosser wrote:
It seems to me that we should make the boot menu more consistent somehow.
I feel like the simplest solution is just to run grub2-mkconfig at every
kernel update, and stop using grubby for this.
If we do this, can we PLEASE drop the braindead Fedora patch which changes
On 18/06/12 09:30, drago01 wrote:
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
much better wheels and leave us behind.
Abstracting for the sake of discussion from the particular case of grub2
could you at least imagine new program which would be worse than the
program
I like the idea like debian does update-grub2 it looks like grub2-mkconfig
its the same thing probably we can switch or remove grubby and just use
grub2-mkconfig its a little bit confusing had both
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.atwrote:
Ben Rosser wrote:
It
Am 18.06.2012 09:30, schrieb drago01:
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 12:16 AM, Matej Cepl mc...@redhat.com wrote:
On 17/06/12 20:15, drago01 wrote:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
Yes, and there are places where we should.
No.
yes
That is to stop reinventing the wheel.
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not willing to change the kernel spec file for this.
The kernel calls 'new-kernel-pkg', which today is provided by grubby.
Despite the similar name, grubby actually works with more than just
grub and grub2. It also
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Andre Robatino
robat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
Ben Rosser rosser.bjr at gmail.com writes:
It seems to me that we should make the boot menu more consistent somehow. I
feel like the simplest solution is just to run grub2-mkconfig at every kernel
update, and
On 18/06/12 15:56, Ben Rosser wrote:
ould seem like a better idea to me.
Hmm, okay.
In that case, would it be possible (or at least, a better idea) to
modify *grubby* to call grub2-mkconfig when the bootloader is grub2?
Then we'd still have all the other abstractions for other bootloaders
but
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
eventually break the advanced menu entries, as well as totally departing
from any user customization of /etc/default/grub.
… vs. grub2-mkconfig,
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 09:30 +0200, drago01 wrote:
That is to stop reinventing the wheel.
This would just result into stagnation while the competition invents
much better wheels and leave us behind.
Right. The phrase 'reinventing the wheel' is easy to misunderstand. The
practice it skewers
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
eventually break the advanced menu entries, as well as totally departing
from any user customization of /etc/default/grub.
On Jun 18, 2012, at 6:36 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jun 18, 2012, at 4:08 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Chris Murphy wrote:
Grubby does not work fine with GRUB 2, it creates sloppy menu lists that
eventually break the advanced menu entries, as well as totally departing
On Mon, 2012-06-18 at 18:57 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote:
As far as I'm aware, there is in fact no reason why you can't remove
grub2 and replace it with grub (legacy) if it has the exact behaviors
you prefer and require.
This is broadly true, but I'd say it's fairly inevitable it'll get more
On 18/06/12 21:18, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 06/18/2012 01:43 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
what competition damned?
grub is the best example for things which did not reinvented
grub1 was easy to understand and configure
And grub1 would get left behind as new filesystems come out and new
firmwares
On 06/19/2012 07:04 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
On 18/06/12 21:18, Jesse Keating wrote:
On 06/18/2012 01:43 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
what competition damned?
grub is the best example for things which did not reinvented
grub1 was easy to understand and configure
And grub1 would get left behind as
On 17/06/12 05:08, Ben Rosser wrote:
In Fedora 17, when you install grub2 and generate a fresh config file,
that config is produced by grub2-mkconfig. However, when you install a
kernel update, the kernel's entry is added to the grub2 boot menu by grubby.
This produces messy grub boot menus.
Am 17.06.2012 06:08, schrieb Ben Rosser:
In Fedora 17, when you install grub2 and generate a fresh config file, that
config is produced by grub2-mkconfig.
However, when you install a kernel update, the kernel's entry is added to the
grub2 boot menu by grubby.
This produces messy grub
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 17.06.2012 06:08, schrieb Ben Rosser:
In Fedora 17, when you install grub2 and generate a fresh config file, that
config is produced by grub2-mkconfig.
However, when you install a kernel update, the kernel's
Am 17.06.2012 20:15, schrieb drago01:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
+1
--
Regards
Heiko Adams
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am 17.06.2012 20:21, schrieb Heiko Adams:
Am 17.06.2012 20:15, schrieb drago01:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
+1
mhh and some changes for the sake of the change are showing that
there are things which are working fine and should not be touched
and changed and to say
On Jun 17, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.06.2012 20:21, schrieb Heiko Adams:
Am 17.06.2012 20:15, schrieb drago01:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
+1
mhh and some changes for the sake of the change are showing that
there are things which are
On 17/06/12 20:15, drago01 wrote:
By that logic we could just stop development today.
Yes, and there are places where we should. That is to stop reinventing
the wheel.
Matěj
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
On Sun, Jun 17, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Ben Rosser rosser@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that we should make the boot menu more consistent somehow. I
feel like the simplest solution is just to run grub2-mkconfig at every
kernel update, and stop using grubby for this. Then everything would look
On 2012-06-16 21:08, Ben Rosser wrote:
It seems to me that we should make the boot menu more consistent
somehow. I feel like the simplest solution is just to run grub2-mkconfig
at every kernel update, and stop using grubby for this. Then everything
would look consistent- the Fedora Linux boot
62 matches
Mail list logo
