List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Friday 29 June 2012 01:59:37 Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Mike Frysinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Monday 25 June 2012 00:15:59 Mike Gilbert wrote:
> >> An official release of grub-2.00 should be coming pretty soon. I would
> >> like to keyword this for ~amd64 and ~x86 shortly after it hits the tree.
> >> I don't do much work on base system packages, so I would like some
> >> advice on how to make this as smooth as possible.
> >> My main concern is that many people probably have sys-boot/grub in
> >> @world. If grub:2 is made visible, portage will install it, and will
> >> remove grub-0.97 on the next depclean. This could be a little confusing,
> >> but should not cause any immediate damage since the copy of grub-0.97
> >> installed in the MBR and /boot would remain intact.
> >> Is this worthy of a news item? Or I just blog about it?
> >> Anything else I need to think about here?
> > do we have automatic migration/updating in place like with grub1 ? that
> > was the biggest reason i didn't unleash it for automatic installing on
> > people's systems.
> No, the grub2 ebuild does not automatically install the files in /boot.
> grub2-install performs this step, and must be run by the user. It also
> installs the MBR and embeds the core image in unused disk sectors.
> This way the MBR/core image is always kept in sync with the files in
> I don't really see a way to reliably call grub2-install from the
> ebuild, and I think this would be a bit unfriendly to the user anyway.
grub1 doesn't seem to have a problem auto-updating itself. why is grub2 any
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part.)