| 1 |
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon <at> gmail.com> writes: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> The don't use it, grub:0 still works just fine |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
It's all working fine (atm). But changes are problematic, or at least |
| 7 |
they have been in the past |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> I gave grub-2 a try earlier this week and once again couldn;t figure out |
| 10 |
> how to install that mini-OS that bootstraps a boot loader which |
| 11 |
> bootstraps a boot loader which loads code that loads a kernel. So back |
| 12 |
> to grub:0 for me |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I do not really want to go to back to grub-legacy. I do not what to |
| 16 |
be bound to (u)efi booting either. You could just lie to me |
| 17 |
and make us both happy? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Most safe (least hassle):: I guess I should just mask it and stay on:: |
| 21 |
sys-boot/grub- 2.02_beta2-r3 |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
It's been fine even with multiple kernel updates........... |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
James |
Archives