1 |
On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2012 15:15:23 -0400 |
3 |
> Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> |
6 |
>> wrote: |
7 |
>> > 3. grub2-install calls grub2-bios-setup which installs boot.img into |
8 |
>> > the MBR and embeds core.img into the sectors immediately after the |
9 |
>> > MBR. |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> Ok, that isn't all that unlike grub1 - that is what stage1.5 is. It |
12 |
>> just sounds like these aren't static files that are copied out of |
13 |
>> /boot/grub, but rather they're built on-demand from other files there. |
14 |
>> Grub1 figures out which static stage1.5 you need based on where /boot |
15 |
>> is. They probably went to a more dynamic model so that they can |
16 |
>> support stuff like LVM+MD+LUKS+etc without having every permutation of |
17 |
>> static code. I'm not sure how smart the bootloader code ends up being |
18 |
>> - it wouldn't surprise me if at time of install the installer does all |
19 |
>> the work and just loads a simple bootloader on the diagnostic cylinder |
20 |
>> with just enough smarts to find /boot if it hasn't changed. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> And if in this complex transition something goes wrong, we could opt |
23 |
> for the solution Ubuntu provided years ago, which was to add to the |
24 |
> grub1 boot loader configuration an entry which would call the grub2 |
25 |
> boot loader, so that grub2's correct function could be ascertained |
26 |
> before the definitive switch to grub2 and removal of the grub1 code. |
27 |
> |
28 |
|
29 |
That is exactly what Doug (cardoe) proposed, and he is working on the |
30 |
docs for that. |