| 1 |
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 5:50 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Thanks for "announcing" this Dale. grub-2.00 is in ~arch as of last night. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> Given your current naming scheme, grub2-mkconfig will not detect your |
| 7 |
>> kernels. They must be named vmlinuz-version or kernel-version. For |
| 8 |
>> example: |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> /boot/vmlinuz-3.4.3 |
| 11 |
>> /boot/kernel-2.6.39-gentoo |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> Your initramfs files look good. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> Space wise, grub needs a couple hundred sectors after your MBR to |
| 16 |
>> embed itself. If you used the default fdisk setting when you |
| 17 |
>> partitioned your drive, you should have 2047 free sectors that it can |
| 18 |
>> use. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> If you have your kernels named properly and some free sectors on your |
| 21 |
>> hard drive, setting up grub:2 is a very easy process. See the wiki |
| 22 |
>> page for more info. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/GRUB2_Quick_Start |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Thanks. Now more questions. I have read about this a few times but |
| 29 |
> never quite figured it out. I copy the bzImage and name it bzImage-* |
| 30 |
> because that is what it is named when I type make etc to build a |
| 31 |
> kernel. Is there a difference between bzImage and vmlinux? If it is, |
| 32 |
> is it safe to rename it like that or will it break something? If I need |
| 33 |
> a vmlinux kernel instead of a bzImage, where is that thing? I have |
| 34 |
> looked and I don't have one on mine here. Maybe I am missing |
| 35 |
> something. Google didn't find me anything either. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
AFAIK, you should be fine renaming bzImage to vmlinuz. (Note the z. |
| 38 |
It's vmlinuz, not vmlinux") |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
-- |
| 41 |
:wq |
Archives