Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-user
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-user: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-user@g.o
From: LK <linuxrocksrulers@...>
Subject: Re: grub vs grub2
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 20:53:09 +0100
On 120214, at 20:29, Andrea Conti wrote:
>> PS: If you know how to get rid of any background image, could you
>> say how?
> Remove or comment out any "splashimage" directives from the config file.
I meant in GRUB2. I have another box with linux mint using GRUB2, and splash backgrounds in GRUB / lowlevel menus or anywhere ("branding") reminds me of commercialism like Apple putting their logo onto every product. (They are good, tho, the apple logo is stylish. Now imagine the iPhone would have a rectangle-like icon with bad proportions)

> Re grub2: as long as grub0 works, I really don't care if grub2 is
> better, cleaner, shinier, more modern or anything else.
> 
> I don't need a freakin' whole OS to boot linux, and having a
> configuration that is so convoluted that it *has to* be generated by
> running a set of scripts makes no sense at all. I thought the days of m4
> and sendmail.cf were over a long time ago...
> 
> I am sure grub2 can be made to work, but for a piece of software as
> vital as a boot loader, that level of complexity in my opinion is
> totally unreasonable and impossible to justify.

I agree to you in a big part. Thanks.

Big companies like Microsoft or Apple are doing a thing i simply call
"Similarisation of features for new/unknowledged users", which always
goes in the reverse direction on long-term. Sample situation: Microsoft
Repair CD: You can select to partition your disk appropiate to how the
assistant will like it. You are being hid from all the details, as you wont
understand them any way.
   Once you try to do something special, you get problems bigger than
without this 'improvement for new ones'. This is because less work is
being done to the detailed way of doing it, and more to the simple,
which is made to just do one or two things.
   Essence: The system is hidden, you only see actions what you can
do (update-grub in our case) instead of the system. This is obviously
wrong because the system, the back-end, takes more than
the front-end. Now the front-end should represent the back-end in a
human readable form and not simplify to fit the least knowledged.

BUT, i guess (from what ive heard) grub2 is fine with editing it by
hand. And the command does really only assist in the simpliest
matter, only combines all actions you'd have to take yourself.
Thanks for the clearance.

(If you want to criticise the above big block of text, I always fail to
express myself well.)

Replies:
Re: grub vs grub2
-- mike@...
Re: grub vs grub2
-- Alex Schuster
Re: grub vs grub2
-- Michael Cook
References:
grub vs grub 2
-- james
Re: grub vs grub 2
-- Florian Philipp
Re: grub vs grub 2
-- LK
Re: grub vs grub 2
-- mike@...
Re: grub vs grub 2
-- LK
Re: grub vs grub 2
-- Andrea Conti
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-user: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: grub vs grub 2
Next by thread:
Re: grub vs grub2
Previous by date:
Re: grub vs grub 2
Next by date:
Re: grub vs grub2


Updated May 04, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-user mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.