| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Heiko Baums <lists@××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am 21.04.2015 um 20:06 schrieb Mike Gilbert: |
| 3 |
>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Heiko Baums <lists@××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Am 21.04.2015 um 01:27 schrieb Mike Gilbert: |
| 5 |
>>> |
| 6 |
>>>> Better yet, upgrade to grub:2 already. |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> Why? As long as grub legacy is working there's no need to upgrade. I'm |
| 9 |
>>> still running grub legacy, too. |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> In this context, because you can build it without having any 32-bit |
| 13 |
>> libs installed. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> That's what grub-static is for. So why would I upgrade to grub:2 if |
| 16 |
> grub:0 is still working? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
You don't have to, other than avoiding stuff like this, or for the |
| 20 |
additional features. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
While all the guides seem to be written around grub2-mkconfig you can |
| 23 |
still use grub the old way and just create your own config file. |
| 24 |
Grub2 is more flexible in terms of supported filesystems and such - |
| 25 |
which is helpful if you're using lvm, mdadm, btrfs, and so on. |
| 26 |
However, I don't think it accepts the old config file syntax so there |
| 27 |
is some effort required to migrate. You'll of course want a rescue |
| 28 |
boot device (but I'd say that applies whether you're migrating or |
| 29 |
not). |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I started out with a grub1-like approach and ended up moving to the |
| 32 |
grub2 style. I just install my kernels with make install and then let |
| 33 |
grub2-mkconfig set up my config files. The only issue I found is that |
| 34 |
if you're playing with git kernels it doesn't always order the |
| 35 |
versioning right (a.b.c+ isn't > a.b.c and things like this). |
| 36 |
However, you can add your own rules to get entries auto-created which |
| 37 |
can be helpful. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Rich |
Archives