| 1 |
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:53:07 -0500 |
| 2 |
Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On 2011-10-04, Neil Bothwick<neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 6 |
> >> On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 04:49:56 -0500, Dale wrote: |
| 7 |
> >> |
| 8 |
> >>> Subject line says it pretty well. Is grub2 stable, who uses it |
| 9 |
> >>> and can you post your experience on the switching process? Was |
| 10 |
> >>> it difficult? |
| 11 |
> >> I use it on my netbook, which I admittedly don't boot more than a |
| 12 |
> >> couple of times a month. It's stable, I can't comment on the |
| 13 |
> >> switching process as I used GRUB2 from the start with this |
| 14 |
> >> machine, it seemed a good time to get to grips with it. |
| 15 |
> >> |
| 16 |
> >> GRUB2 is neither complicated nor difficult, but it is different. |
| 17 |
> > I've only used it on Ubuntu, and maybe it's just Ubuntu's |
| 18 |
> > implementation -- but it was both complicated and difficult. There |
| 19 |
> > are 10X as many files, and to change anything you edit a whole set |
| 20 |
> > of configuration files and run a utility that generates _another_ |
| 21 |
> > set of configuration files. |
| 22 |
> > |
| 23 |
> > Compared to "vi /boot/grub/menu.lst; reboot", that's complicated. |
| 24 |
> > |
| 25 |
> >> If you try to think in terms of legacy GRUB, you will have more |
| 26 |
> >> problems than if you approach is as learning a new system. |
| 27 |
> > At first glace, grub2 looks like a minature Unix installation whose |
| 28 |
> > purpose is to boot a bigger Unix installation. It's got it's own |
| 29 |
> > init system and it's own set of init scripts. |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Could this fix the mess with /usr and /var having to be on / or a |
| 33 |
> initramfs? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
No that's a completely different issue. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
But the warped thinking that produces it is exactly the same. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Alan McKinnnon |
| 43 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |
Archives