| 1 |
On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 18:15:06 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Me, I have always put ext2 on /boot. I just don't see much need in |
| 4 |
> > anything fancy for something that is used so seldom plus everything is |
| 5 |
> > likely stored somewhere else anyway. The kernel should be in the |
| 6 |
> > kernel source directory and a emerge of grub would restore everything |
| 7 |
> > else except the config. Not much to lose there. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
One of the benefits of GRUB2 is that the information used to create the |
| 10 |
config file is in /etc. If /boot is toasted, you can recreate all you |
| 11 |
need with |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
grub2-install |
| 14 |
grub2-mkconfig |
| 15 |
cd /usr/src/linux |
| 16 |
make install |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Not to mention that /boot usually has a noauto option, so it's very |
| 19 |
> unlikely that a wayward prog can somehow bollix up the filesystem. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Leaving /boot unmounted invites the inevitable error of forgetting to |
| 22 |
mount it before installing a new kernel. I prefer to mount it ro, that |
| 23 |
way its contents are available, protected from accidental overwriting and |
| 24 |
it shouts at you if you forget to remount it before installing a kernel |
| 25 |
or updating GRUB. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
But I thought YOU did the backups... |
Archives