1 |
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> An official release of grub-2.00 should be coming pretty soon. I would |
3 |
> like to keyword this for ~amd64 and ~x86 shortly after it hits the tree. |
4 |
> I don't do much work on base system packages, so I would like some |
5 |
> advice on how to make this as smooth as possible. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> My main concern is that many people probably have sys-boot/grub in |
8 |
> @world. If grub:2 is made visible, portage will install it, and will |
9 |
> remove grub-0.97 on the next depclean. This could be a little confusing, |
10 |
> but should not cause any immediate damage since the copy of grub-0.97 |
11 |
> installed in the MBR and /boot would remain intact. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Is this worthy of a news item? Or I just blog about it? |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Anything else I need to think about here? |
16 |
> |
17 |
> Note: The Gentoo Documentation Project has indicated that they do not |
18 |
> want to add anything to the handbook until we are somewhat close to |
19 |
> stabilizing grub:2. That's at least a couple months away. |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
Mike, |
23 |
|
24 |
Since Grub Legacy and Grub 2 are slotted, Portage won't remove the |
25 |
older version. Even if it removes the older one, everything necessary |
26 |
is installed into /boot and the MBR already. |
27 |
|
28 |
The best route forward would be to instruct people to use |
29 |
grub2-install (but whatever the flag is to prevent MBR installation). |
30 |
Have people generate their grub.cfg with grub2-mkconfig and then put a |
31 |
chain loader into the Grub Legacy configs so that they can test Grub 2 |
32 |
and then once they test it tell them to install Grub 2 into the MBR |
33 |
and remove Grub Legacy. |
34 |
|
35 |
I'll gladly work with you on this. IMHO, it might be a good plan to |
36 |
unmask and ~arch one of the release candidates with an aim to get Grub |
37 |
2.0.0 fully released with docs. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- |
40 |
Doug Goldstein |