| 1 |
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 03:10:55PM +0000, James wrote: |
| 2 |
> James <wireless <at> tampabay.rr.com> writes: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > So on one particular (openrc) system, I have no interest in grub-2 |
| 6 |
> > or any other bootloaders. I see grub is both grub 1 and grub 2. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> So some vintage installs/upgrades got me thinking. What does Grub-2 |
| 9 |
> offer that grub-1 does not. I cannot think of anything that I need |
| 10 |
> from Grub-2 not mbr, nor efi board booting. Not dual/multi booting |
| 11 |
> as grub-1 excels on that, and not on drives larger than 2 T. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> So what is the (hardware scenario) where grub-2 and it's problems |
| 15 |
> are superior to grub-1? I'm having trouble thinking of that |
| 16 |
> situation.......? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
64-bit hardware with the no-multilib profile[1]. I have no "-bin" packages |
| 19 |
on my system, nor do I run any pre-built 3rd party applications, so I |
| 20 |
waste no time compiling worthless 32-bit libraries. Therefore, I need |
| 21 |
grub 2. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Alec |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
1. |
| 26 |
> emerge -p grub:0 |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> .... |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> AMD64 Team; <amd64@g.o> |
| 31 |
> grub-1 is not available on no-multilib profiles; |
Archives