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