Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 22/2/18 7:43 am, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/21/2018 12:35 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
My question around the time I was installing, I think F26 from 
scratch the first time on my 2 TB hard disk that now has both Fedora 
and Ubuntu on it. As a trial I made the entire hard disk GPT. I then 
ran the install process for Fedora from a live disk, I can't remember 
exactly where in the install process this happened, but the install 
aborted with the message that Fedora cannot be booted from a GPT 
disk. Not understanding the message I did searches for the message on 
the net and all the hits I found said the same thing, that Fedora 
cannot be booted from GPT.


Hence I'm asking with the current Fedora version is it still the case 
that Fedora cannot be booted from GPT?


I'm curious about the exact error message because Fedora has been able 
to boot from GPT for several versions.  You do need to match an EFI 
boot with a GPT partition or a BIOS boot with an MSDOS partition 
otherwise there are complications.


At the time that I was doing this, GPT was being specified as designed 
for hard disks bigger than 3TB (I think this was the size) and even 
though I only had a 2TB hard disk I thought I would try it out, and I 
had efi disabled in the motherboard bios. I may be remember this 
incorrectly, but I think I got through to the process to set up the 
partitions on the GPT disk, and as I run with a separate /boot partition 
I went to create that and that is when it said the Fedora could not be 
booted from a GPT device. I can't replicate this as I don't have an 
environment that I can wipe to try GPT out again.



regards,

Steve


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tom H]

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Samuel Sieb  wrote:
> On 02/20/2018 03:41 AM, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> Ubuntu's using an MS sig. The difference between Fedora and Ubuntu is
>> that the latter doesn't require that kernel modules be signed.
>
> If that's true, then I think they're in violation of the secure boot rules.
> And even if not, it makes secure boot ineffective anyway.

It's a matter of opinion. If MS, as the SB enforcer, thought that
Ubuntu was violating SB, it'd have blacklisted its sig from being
validated and chainloaded by the MS firmware sig.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/21/2018 12:35 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
My question around the time I was installing, I think F26 from scratch 
the first time on my 2 TB hard disk that now has both Fedora and Ubuntu 
on it. As a trial I made the entire hard disk GPT. I then ran the 
install process for Fedora from a live disk, I can't remember exactly 
where in the install process this happened, but the install aborted with 
the message that Fedora cannot be booted from a GPT disk. Not 
understanding the message I did searches for the message on the net and 
all the hits I found said the same thing, that Fedora cannot be booted 
from GPT.


Hence I'm asking with the current Fedora version is it still the case 
that Fedora cannot be booted from GPT?


I'm curious about the exact error message because Fedora has been able 
to boot from GPT for several versions.  You do need to match an EFI boot 
with a GPT partition or a BIOS boot with an MSDOS partition otherwise 
there are complications.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 21/2/18 5:02 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/20/2018 01:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 20/2/18 7:39 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/12/2018 01:32 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Wouldn't grub2-install be used to install the boot sectors to the 
/boot partition? This question is coming from the days when I 
formatted an entire hard disk as GPT and tried to install an older 
Fedora system on it and had the install fail with the message that 
Fedora could not be booted from a GPT environment.


There are no boot sectors with EFI.  The necessary files that go in 
the EFI partition at /boot/efi are in the grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 
packages.


This question was not so much aimed at efi, but rather is it still 
the case that /boot cannot be placed in a GPT partition?


I don't understand the question.  There are no boot sectors in the 
/boot partition.  The boot sector is the MBR on a non-GPT drive. Linux 
understands GPT partitions just as well as the old style, so if you 
really want to, you can put /boot on its own GPT partition.  On an EFI 
system, the kernel and initramfs are still in /boot which is not part 
of the EFI boot partition.


My question around the time I was installing, I think F26 from scratch 
the first time on my 2 TB hard disk that now has both Fedora and Ubuntu 
on it. As a trial I made the entire hard disk GPT. I then ran the 
install process for Fedora from a live disk, I can't remember exactly 
where in the install process this happened, but the install aborted with 
the message that Fedora cannot be booted from a GPT disk. Not 
understanding the message I did searches for the message on the net and 
all the hits I found said the same thing, that Fedora cannot be booted 
from GPT.


Hence I'm asking with the current Fedora version is it still the case 
that Fedora cannot be booted from GPT?



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/20/2018 01:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 20/2/18 7:39 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/12/2018 01:32 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Wouldn't grub2-install be used to install the boot sectors to the 
/boot partition? This question is coming from the days when I 
formatted an entire hard disk as GPT and tried to install an older 
Fedora system on it and had the install fail with the message that 
Fedora could not be booted from a GPT environment.


There are no boot sectors with EFI.  The necessary files that go in 
the EFI partition at /boot/efi are in the grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 
packages.


This question was not so much aimed at efi, but rather is it still the 
case that /boot cannot be placed in a GPT partition?


I don't understand the question.  There are no boot sectors in the /boot 
partition.  The boot sector is the MBR on a non-GPT drive.  Linux 
understands GPT partitions just as well as the old style, so if you 
really want to, you can put /boot on its own GPT partition.  On an EFI 
system, the kernel and initramfs are still in /boot which is not part of 
the EFI boot partition.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/20/2018 01:24 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 20/2/18 7:33 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:
EFI systems have a special partition that contains as many bootloaders 
as you want.  It solves the problem of who gets to control the MBR 
bootloader location.


Are they the .efi files that are in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT on a system that 
doesn't have the separate partition?


If the files are not on the right partition, then EFI won't boot from them.

Just on the separate partition front, if I boot between Win 10, Fedora 
27 and Ubuntu 17.10 on the one machine, do I need 3 separate partitions 
or can the 3 operating system share the one partition if I decide to 
activate efi on my machine?


Yes, the point is that there is one partition for all the operating 
systems to put their bootloaders in.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/20/2018 03:41 AM, Tom H wrote:

Ubuntu's using an MS sig. The difference between Fedora and Ubuntu is
that the latter doesn't require that kernel modules be signed.


If that's true, then I think they're in violation of the secure boot 
rules.  And even if not, it makes secure boot ineffective anyway.



AFAIK, "shim" is signed by MS (and is validated by an MS-supplied and
-signed "thingy" in the firmware) and it embeds the Fedora sig with
which grub, the kernel, and the kernel modules are signed and
validated.


Correct.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tim]

Allegedly, on or about 21 February 2018, Stephen Morris sent:
> Those packages are installed on my system even though, as far as I'm 
> aware I have never had efi active, and I have never used a
> motherboard that had SecureBoot enabled. I did not explicitly install
> those packages and my assumption is they were installed with the F27
> upgrade, but I can verify whether they were installed in F26 or not.

On my Fedora 26 installation, which was a 64-bit fresh install on a
blank drive, without using any secure boot options, I have these:

~]$ tree /boot/efi/
/boot/efi/
├── EFI
│   ├── BOOT
│   │   ├── BOOTX64.EFI
│   │   └── fallback.efi
│   └── fedora
│   ├── BOOT.CSV
│   ├── fonts
│   │   └── unicode.pf2
│   ├── gcdx64.efi
│   ├── grubenv
│   ├── grubx64.efi
│   ├── MokManager.efi
│   ├── shim.efi
│   └── shim-fedora.efi
├── mach_kernel
└── System
└── Library
└── CoreServices

And these:

 ~]$ tree /usr/lib/grub/
/usr/lib/grub/
└── i386-pc
├── acpi.mod
├── acpi.module
├── adler32.mod
├── adler32.module
├── affs.mod
├── affs.module
├── afs.mod
├── afs.module
├── ahci.mod
├── ahci.module
├── all_video.mod
├── all_video.module
├── aout.mod
├── aout.module
├── archelp.mod
├── archelp.module
├── ata.mod
├── ata.module
├── at_keyboard.mod
├── at_keyboard.module
├── backtrace.mod
├── backtrace.module
├── bfs.mod
├── bfs.module
├── biosdisk.mod
├── biosdisk.module
├── bitmap.mod
├── bitmap.module
├── bitmap_scale.mod
├── bitmap_scale.module
├── blocklist.mod
├── blocklist.module
├── blscfg.mod
├── blscfg.module
├── boot_hybrid.image
├── boot_hybrid.img
├── boot.image
├── boot.img
├── boot.mod
├── boot.module
├── bsd.mod
├── bsd.module
├── bswap_test.mod
├── bswap_test.module
├── btrfs.mod
├── btrfs.module
├── bufio.mod
├── bufio.module
├── cat.mod
├── cat.module
├── cbfs.mod
├── cbfs.module
├── cbls.mod
├── cbls.module
├── cbmemc.mod
├── cbmemc.module
├── cbtable.mod
├── cbtable.module
├── cbtime.mod
├── cbtime.module
├── cdboot.image
├── cdboot.img
├── chain.mod
├── chain.module
├── cmdline_cat_test.mod
├── cmdline_cat_test.module
├── cmosdump.mod
├── cmosdump.module
├── cmostest.mod
├── cmostest.module
├── cmp.mod
├── cmp.module
├── cmp_test.mod
├── cmp_test.module
├── command.lst
├── configfile.mod
├── configfile.module
├── config.h
├── cpio_be.mod
├── cpio_be.module
├── cpio.mod
├── cpio.module
├── cpuid.mod
├── cpuid.module
├── crc64.mod
├── crc64.module
├── cryptodisk.mod
├── cryptodisk.module
├── crypto.lst
├── crypto.mod
├── crypto.module
├── cs5536.mod
├── cs5536.module
├── ctz_test.mod
├── ctz_test.module
├── datehook.mod
├── datehook.module
├── date.mod
├── date.module
├── datetime.mod
├── datetime.module
├── diskboot.image
├── diskboot.img
├── diskfilter.mod
├── diskfilter.module
├── disk.mod
├── disk.module
├── div.mod
├── div.module
├── div_test.mod
├── div_test.module
├── dm_nv.mod
├── dm_nv.module
├── drivemap.mod
├── drivemap.module
├── echo.mod
├── echo.module
├── efiemu32.o
├── efiemu64.o
├── efiemu.mod
├── efiemu.module
├── ehci.mod
├── ehci.module
├── elf.mod
├── elf.module
├── eval.mod
├── eval.module
├── exfat.mod
├── exfat.module
├── exfctest.mod
├── exfctest.module
├── ext2.mod
├── ext2.module
├── extcmd.mod
├── extcmd.module
├── fat.mod
├── fat.module
├── file.mod
├── file.module
├── font.mod
├── font.module
├── freedos.mod
├── freedos.module
├── fshelp.mod
├── fshelp.module
├── fs.lst
├── functional_test.mod
├── functional_test.module
├── gcry_arcfour.mod
├── gcry_arcfour.module
├── gcry_blowfish.mod
├── gcry_blowfish.module
├── gcry_camellia.mod
├── gcry_camellia.module
├── gcry_cast5.mod
├── gcry_cast5.module
├── gcry_crc.mod
├── gcry_crc.module
├── gcry_des.mod
├── gcry_des.module
├── gcry_dsa.mod
├── gcry_dsa.module
├── gcry_idea.mod
├── gcry_idea.module
├── gcry_md4.mod
├── gcry_md4.module
├── gcry_md5.mod
├── gcry_md5.module
├── gcry_rfc2268.mod
├── gcry_rfc2268.module
├── gcry_rijndael.mod
├── gcry_rijndael.module
├── gcry_rmd160.mod
├── gcry_rmd160.module
├── gcry_rsa.mod
├── gcry_rsa.module
├── gcry_seed.mod
├── gcry_seed.module
├── gcry_serpent.mod
├── gcry_serpent.module
├── gcry_sha1.mod
├── gcry_sha1.module
├── gcry_sha256.mod
├── gcry_sha256.module
├── gcry_sha512.mod
├── gcry_sha512.module

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 20/2/18 7:39 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/12/2018 01:32 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Wouldn't grub2-install be used to install the boot sectors to the 
/boot partition? This question is coming from the days when I 
formatted an entire hard disk as GPT and tried to install an older 
Fedora system on it and had the install fail with the message that 
Fedora could not be booted from a GPT environment.


There are no boot sectors with EFI.  The necessary files that go in 
the EFI partition at /boot/efi are in the grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 
packages.


This question was not so much aimed at efi, but rather is it still the 
case that /boot cannot be placed in a GPT partition?



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 20/2/18 7:33 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/14/2018 01:51 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
It could be. As I understand it the default functionality updates the 
mbr on the specified device, and from what I've read in other 
threads, I thought they said that to get the grub menu displayed at 
boot you don't update the mbr on an efi system any more, all that is 
necessary is to just run grub2-mkconfig.


EFI systems have a special partition that contains as many bootloaders 
as you want.  It solves the problem of who gets to control the MBR 
bootloader location.


Are they the .efi files that are in /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT on a system that 
doesn't have the separate partition?


Just on the separate partition front, if I boot between Win 10, Fedora 
27 and Ubuntu 17.10 on the one machine, do I need 3 separate partitions 
or can the 3 operating system share the one partition if I decide to 
activate efi on my machine?



regards.

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 20/2/18 7:43 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/19/2018 12:13 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
I thought that with SB all your drivers etc had to be signed to be 
able to boot from a SecureBoot system, and as such Fedora were using 
Microsoft certificates, whereas Ubuntu was going down the path of 
self signing. Given what you said around the 
/usrlib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed directory, which doesn't exist on my 
system, and if I understood you correctly doesn't exist in fedora 
anyway, where are fedora's certificates, and, if I enable SecureBoot 
in my bios do I have to also load the default certificates that the 
bios offers?


Each OS has to get their bootloader to be signed by Microsoft's 
certificate for the BIOS to accept it.  It is usually possible to add 
your own certificate to the BIOS store, but that is a somewhat 
convoluted process that most users would not want to try going 
through. Fedora's signed bootloader shim is in the shim-x64 package 
and the EFI grub executables are in the grub2-efi-x64 package.


Those packages are installed on my system even though, as far as I'm 
aware I have never had efi active, and I have never used a motherboard 
that had SecureBoot enabled. I did not explicitly install those packages 
and my assumption is they were installed with the F27 upgrade, but I can 
verify whether they were installed in F26 or not.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tom H]

On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 3:13 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:
>
> I thought that with SB all your drivers etc had to be signed to be
> able to boot from a SecureBoot system, and as such Fedora were using
> Microsoft certificates, whereas Ubuntu was going down the path of self
> signing. Given what you said around the /usrlib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed
> directory, which doesn't exist on my system, and if I understood you
> correctly doesn't exist in fedora anyway, where are fedora's
> certificates, and, if I enable SecureBoot in my bios do I have to also
> load the default certificates that the bios offers?

Ubuntu's using an MS sig. The difference between Fedora and Ubuntu is
that the latter doesn't require that kernel modules be signed.

The "/usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/" is an Ubuntu directory. So the
signed grub EFI executable is in "/boot/efi/EFI/ubuntu/" and
"/usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/". Fedora only ships the grub EFI
executable in "/boot/efi/EFI/fedora/". So, if you run "grub-install"
it's recreated and unsigned (I assume!).

AFAIK, "shim" is signed by MS (and is validated by an MS-supplied and
-signed "thingy" in the firmware) and it embeds the Fedora sig with
which grub, the kernel, and the kernel modules are signed and
validated.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/19/2018 12:13 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
I thought that with SB all your drivers etc had to be signed to be able 
to boot from a SecureBoot system, and as such Fedora were using 
Microsoft certificates, whereas Ubuntu was going down the path of self 
signing. Given what you said around the /usrlib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed 
directory, which doesn't exist on my system, and if I understood you 
correctly doesn't exist in fedora anyway, where are fedora's 
certificates, and, if I enable SecureBoot in my bios do I have to also 
load the default certificates that the bios offers?


Each OS has to get their bootloader to be signed by Microsoft's 
certificate for the BIOS to accept it.  It is usually possible to add 
your own certificate to the BIOS store, but that is a somewhat 
convoluted process that most users would not want to try going through. 
Fedora's signed bootloader shim is in the shim-x64 package and the EFI 
grub executables are in the grub2-efi-x64 package.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/12/2018 01:32 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Wouldn't grub2-install be used to install the boot sectors to the /boot 
partition? This question is coming from the days when I formatted an 
entire hard disk as GPT and tried to install an older Fedora system on 
it and had the install fail with the message that Fedora could not be 
booted from a GPT environment.


There are no boot sectors with EFI.  The necessary files that go in the 
EFI partition at /boot/efi are in the grub2-efi-x64 and shim-x64 packages.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/14/2018 01:51 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
It could be. As I understand it the default functionality updates the 
mbr on the specified device, and from what I've read in other threads, I 
thought they said that to get the grub menu displayed at boot you don't 
update the mbr on an efi system any more, all that is necessary is to 
just run grub2-mkconfig.


EFI systems have a special partition that contains as many bootloaders 
as you want.  It solves the problem of who gets to control the MBR 
bootloader location.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 20/2/18 3:51 am, Tom H wrote:

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:

On 14/2/18 8:18 pm, Tom H wrote:

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:

Thanks Tom. My statement was from having seen other threads on this
list saying to not run grub2-install on an efi system because it
wasn't needed.

You're welcome.

Chris M has said that grub2-install shouldn't be used on an EFI
system. Maybe it does the wrong thing when you don't specify
"--target=...-efi" because the default is "--target=i386-pc".

It could be. As I understand it the default functionality updates the
mbr on the specified device, and from what I've read in other threads,
I thought they said that to get the grub menu displayed at boot you
don't update the mbr on an efi system any more, all that is necessary
is to just run grub2-mkconfig.

I'd be surprised if "grub-install" defaults to "--target=i386-pc" on
EFI if you don't include "--target=x86_64-efi" n the command. Maybe;
but I'd expect grub to detect that it's running on an EFI system...
I suspect grub is detecting which architecture is in use. In my 
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT the only .efi entries in there other than 
fallback.efi are x86_64 versions. Also in /boot/efi/EFI/fedora fwupdate 
has made what I assume are its 32-bit and 64-bit .efi files executable 
and grubx64.efi is also executable. Also /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubenv 
seems to have its only line, being a saved_entry line, updated every 
time the machine is booted to reflect the version of the kernel last 
booted from. This surprises me, as I have never installed Win 10, Fedora 
27 or Ubuntu 17.10 in efi format, hence as far as I am aware I'm not 
using efi even though the motherboard I am using now doesn't appear to 
have any means to explicitly turn efi off, other than the SecureBoot 
option, which my previous motherboard that did have the capability of 
explicitly disabling efi didn't have, also I have SecureBoot disabled in 
the bios.


I think that I now remember Chris M's objection. It's that the EFI
executable that "grub-install" drops onto the ESP isn't signed, which
is problematic on SB systems. Ubuntu's "grub-install" has a
"--uefi-secure-boot" option to install a signed EFI executable (I
_assume_ that "/usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/grubx64.efi.signed" is
copied to the ESP) but Fedora's grub doesn't have either of these so
Chris must be right for the SB case.


I thought that with SB all your drivers etc had to be signed to be able 
to boot from a SecureBoot system, and as such Fedora were using 
Microsoft certificates, whereas Ubuntu was going down the path of self 
signing. Given what you said around the /usrlib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed 
directory, which doesn't exist on my system, and if I understood you 
correctly doesn't exist in fedora anyway, where are fedora's 
certificates, and, if I enable SecureBoot in my bios do I have to also 
load the default certificates that the bios offers?



regards,

Steve


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tom H]

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 4:51 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:
> On 14/2/18 8:18 pm, Tom H wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Morris
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks Tom. My statement was from having seen other threads on this
>>> list saying to not run grub2-install on an efi system because it
>>> wasn't needed.
>>
>> You're welcome.
>>
>> Chris M has said that grub2-install shouldn't be used on an EFI
>> system. Maybe it does the wrong thing when you don't specify
>> "--target=...-efi" because the default is "--target=i386-pc".
>
> It could be. As I understand it the default functionality updates the
> mbr on the specified device, and from what I've read in other threads,
> I thought they said that to get the grub menu displayed at boot you
> don't update the mbr on an efi system any more, all that is necessary
> is to just run grub2-mkconfig.

I'd be surprised if "grub-install" defaults to "--target=i386-pc" on
EFI if you don't include "--target=x86_64-efi" n the command. Maybe;
but I'd expect grub to detect that it's running on an EFI system...

I think that I now remember Chris M's objection. It's that the EFI
executable that "grub-install" drops onto the ESP isn't signed, which
is problematic on SB systems. Ubuntu's "grub-install" has a
"--uefi-secure-boot" option to install a signed EFI executable (I
_assume_ that "/usr/lib/grub/x86_64-efi-signed/grubx64.efi.signed" is
copied to the ESP) but Fedora's grub doesn't have either of these so
Chris must be right for the SB case.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 14/2/18 8:18 pm, Tom H wrote:

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:

On 12/2/18 9:12 pm, Tom H wrote:

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Samuel Sieb  wrote:

Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted
disk.

You can specify "TARGET" with "--target=". From the man page:

--target=TARGET

install GRUB for TARGET platform [default=i386-pc]; available
targets: arm-efi ... arm64-efi ... i386-efi ... ia64-efi ...
x86_64-efi ...

Thanks Tom. My statement was from having seen other threads on this
list saying to not run grub2-install on an efi system because it
wasn't needed.

You're welcome.

Chris M has said that grub2-install shouldn't be used on an EFI
system. Maybe it does the wrong thing when you don't specify
"--target=...-efi" because the default is "--target=i386-pc".


It could be. As I understand it the default functionality updates the 
mbr on the specified device, and from what I've read in other threads, I 
thought they said that to get the grub menu displayed at boot you don't 
update the mbr on an efi system any more, all that is necessary is to 
just run grub2-mkconfig.



regards,

Steve


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tom H]

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Morris
 wrote:
> On 12/2/18 9:12 pm, Tom H wrote:
>> On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Samuel Sieb  wrote:
>>>
>>> Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted
>>> disk.
>>
>> You can specify "TARGET" with "--target=". From the man page:
>>
>> --target=TARGET
>>
>> install GRUB for TARGET platform [default=i386-pc]; available
>> targets: arm-efi ... arm64-efi ... i386-efi ... ia64-efi ...
>> x86_64-efi ...
>
> Thanks Tom. My statement was from having seen other threads on this
> list saying to not run grub2-install on an efi system because it
> wasn't needed.

You're welcome.

Chris M has said that grub2-install shouldn't be used on an EFI
system. Maybe it does the wrong thing when you don't specify
"--target=...-efi" because the default is "--target=i386-pc".
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 12/2/18 12:50 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/11/2018 01:23 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 11/2/18 5:46 pm, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

grub2-install is not needed I think.


Thanks Francis, I'll check that out. Grub2-install is still required 
to update the mbr on non-efi (legacy) systems.


That's true, but it very rarely needs the boot sector loader updated. 
Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted disk.


Wouldn't grub2-install be used to install the boot sectors to the /boot 
partition? This question is coming from the days when I formatted an 
entire hard disk as GPT and tried to install an older Fedora system on 
it and had the install fail with the message that Fedora could not be 
booted from a GPT environment.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 12/2/18 9:12 pm, Tom H wrote:

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Samuel Sieb  wrote:

On 02/11/2018 01:23 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 11/2/18 5:46 pm, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

grub2-install is not needed I think.

Thanks Francis, I'll check that out. Grub2-install is still required
to update the mbr on non-efi (legacy) systems.

That's true, but it very rarely needs the boot sector loader updated.
Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted disk.

You can specify "TARGET" with "--target=". From the man page:

--target=TARGET

install GRUB for TARGET platform [default=i386-pc]; available targets:
arm-efi ... arm64-efi ... i386-efi ... ia64-efi ... x86_64-efi ...


Thanks Tom. My statement was from having seen other threads on this list 
saying to not run grub2-install on an efi system because it wasn't needed.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 12/2/18 12:48 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/11/2018 01:19 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Just further to this, I have checked my boot order in the bios and it 
is set to SSD, CDROM, UEFI: Builtin efi shell.


If at boot time I display the boot menu it shows this as SSD, HARD 
DISK 1, HARD DISK 2, CDROM 1, CDROM 2, UEFI: Builtin efi shell, with 
SSD being the default boot device.


So you do have an EFI system.  You're just booting it by default as 
CSM.  Better not to remove those packages then. :-)


Also in the bios Security section I have Secure Boot explicitly 
disabled, and the bios also says that Secure Boot can only be used if 
the system is in 'User Mode'.


Why are you mentioning this?  Secure Boot is optional for EFI. You can 
still boot in EFI mode whether secure boot is enabled or not.  But you 
can't use secure boot if you boot in CSM mode.


I was mentioning this because I thought Secure Boot was EFI (especially 
when enabling Secure Boot provides me with an option to load default 
keys if I want to). Also unlike my previous motherboard where the Bios 
provided me with options to run the system in Legacy Mode, UEFI mode or 
UEFI first then Legacy, and provide a drag and drop method for boot 
ordering between Legacy or UEFI devices, the motherboard I am using now 
does not provide any indication that UEFI is available and whether or 
not I want to use it, other than the Shell boot order option (which is 
nothing more than a shell that has to be exited from to actually boot to 
the grub menu) and the Secure Boot option which I have never seen on any 
previous motherboard I've had. Hence my assumption, which may be 
completely wrong, was that whether I was booting UEFI or not was 
determine by whether I had Secure Boot enabled or not. I was also 
assuming that as F27 is a double upgrade from F26 that was installed and 
run in non-UEFI mode (I don't have any efi partitions for any of the 3 
operating systems I'm running on this machine) it is running in Legacy mode.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tom H]

On Sun, Feb 11, 2018 at 8:50 PM, Samuel Sieb  wrote:
> On 02/11/2018 01:23 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
>> On 11/2/18 5:46 pm, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:
>>>
>>> grub2-install is not needed I think.
>>
>> Thanks Francis, I'll check that out. Grub2-install is still required
>> to update the mbr on non-efi (legacy) systems.
>
> That's true, but it very rarely needs the boot sector loader updated.
> Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted disk.

You can specify "TARGET" with "--target=". From the man page:

--target=TARGET

install GRUB for TARGET platform [default=i386-pc]; available targets:
arm-efi ... arm64-efi ... i386-efi ... ia64-efi ... x86_64-efi ...
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/11/2018 01:23 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 11/2/18 5:46 pm, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

grub2-install is not needed I think.


Thanks Francis, I'll check that out. Grub2-install is still required to 
update the mbr on non-efi (legacy) systems.


That's true, but it very rarely needs the boot sector loader updated. 
Also, I don't know what grub2-install would do to a GPT formatted disk.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/11/2018 01:19 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Just further to this, I have checked my boot order in the bios and it is 
set to SSD, CDROM, UEFI: Builtin efi shell.


If at boot time I display the boot menu it shows this as SSD, HARD DISK 
1, HARD DISK 2, CDROM 1, CDROM 2, UEFI: Builtin efi shell, with SSD 
being the default boot device.


So you do have an EFI system.  You're just booting it by default as CSM. 
 Better not to remove those packages then. :-)


Also in the bios Security section I have Secure Boot explicitly 
disabled, and the bios also says that Secure Boot can only be used if 
the system is in 'User Mode'.


Why are you mentioning this?  Secure Boot is optional for EFI.  You can 
still boot in EFI mode whether secure boot is enabled or not.  But you 
can't use secure boot if you boot in CSM mode.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/11/2018 12:58 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
I've issued the command rpm -qf /boot/efi and it tells me it was owned 
by fwupdate-efi-10-1.fc27.x86_64.


I've also issue the command rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubenv and 
that is owned by grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


The command rpm -qf /boot/efi/mach_kernel tells me it is owned by 
mactel-boot-0.9-16.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi says it is owned by 
grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/shim.efi says it is owned by 
shim-x64-13-0.7.x86_64.


Ok, I wonder what pulled all those things in.  Those are all the efi 
boot packages including the mac one!  Feel free to remove those packages 
since they would only be useful on an EFI system.


I haven't issued the command against the other .efi files in the fedora 
sudirectory, but from their names I would assume they are owned by 
multiple different packages. The thing that sticks out with these .efi 
files in the fedora directory is that fwupia32.efi and fwupx64.efi are 
executable by owner which is root, but grubx64.efi is world executable, 
and, those 3 files are the only ones of the 8 .efi files present that 
are executable.


Normally those permission settings are irrelevant because those files 
should be on the efi partition which is fat32 and doesn't support that.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 11/2/18 5:46 pm, francis.montag...@inria.fr wrote:

Hi.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:07:50 +1100 Stephen Morris wrote:


Just some info on this. The original format of your grub menu, being one
line per kernel, was probably coming from grubby. When kernel installs
are done, the install process runs grubby by default to build grub.cfg
and update the mbr (in a non-efi system) and grubby builds grub.cfg with
a line per kernel. I don't like that format so after every kernel
install I manually run grub2-mkconfig and grub2-install to get the menu
with a single line for the current kernel and and Advanced sub-menu for
the other kernels.

You can make that automatic by adding a script in

   /etc/kernel/postinst.d/

to call grub2-mkconfig -o ...

grub2-install is not needed I think.


Thanks Francis, I'll check that out. Grub2-install is still required to 
update the mbr on non-efi (legacy) systems.



regards,

Steve





___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 12/2/18 7:58 am, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 11/2/18 7:00 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/10/2018 04:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 10/2/18 5:46 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/09/2018 09:40 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. 
Since

it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are 
in UEFI

boot mode at the time of install.


What's in yours?  Are any of the files owned?  Mine is just an 
empty directory tree to /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/.  I just checked 
further and that directory is owned by grub-common, but not the 
parent directories.


I've just checked my efi directory, and /boot/efi is owned by 
'root', as are directories /boot/efi/EFI and /boot/efi/System and 
file /boot/efi/mach_kernel. Drilling a little bit further 
directories /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT and /boot/efi/EFI/fedora are also 
owned by root, as is directory /boot/efi/System/Library, so I'm 
assuming everything is.


Sorry for not being more clear.  I mean owned in the rpm way. If you 
do "rpm -qf /path/to/file" it will tell you which package put the 
file (or directory) there.


I'm not concerned so much by the space that structure is using, but 
more just querying why it is there, and, if I happen to delete that 
structure will that cause any problems, or, if I do delete it is 
something going to put it back?


If you don't have an EFI system, then deleting those files shouldn't 
make any difference.  But I'm curious, since you actually have files 
in there, can you check what package owns them as described above?


I've issued the command rpm -qf /boot/efi and it tells me it was owned 
by fwupdate-efi-10-1.fc27.x86_64.


I've also issue the command rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubenv and 
that is owned by grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


The command rpm -qf /boot/efi/mach_kernel tells me it is owned by 
mactel-boot-0.9-16.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi says it is owned by 
grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/shim.efi says it is owned by 
shim-x64-13-0.7.x86_64.


I haven't issued the command against the other .efi files in the 
fedora sudirectory, but from their names I would assume they are owned 
by multiple different packages. The thing that sticks out with these 
.efi files in the fedora directory is that fwupia32.efi and 
fwupx64.efi are executable by owner which is root, but grubx64.efi is 
world executable, and, those 3 files are the only ones of the 8 .efi 
files present that are executable.


Just further to this, I have checked my boot order in the bios and it is 
set to SSD, CDROM, UEFI: Builtin efi shell.


If at boot time I display the boot menu it shows this as SSD, HARD DISK 
1, HARD DISK 2, CDROM 1, CDROM 2, UEFI: Builtin efi shell, with SSD 
being the default boot device.


Also in the bios Security section I have Secure Boot explicitly 
disabled, and the bios also says that Secure Boot can only be used if 
the system is in 'User Mode'.



regards,

Steve





regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 11/2/18 7:00 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/10/2018 04:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 10/2/18 5:46 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/09/2018 09:40 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. 
Since

it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are in 
UEFI

boot mode at the time of install.


What's in yours?  Are any of the files owned?  Mine is just an empty 
directory tree to /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/.  I just checked further and 
that directory is owned by grub-common, but not the parent directories.


I've just checked my efi directory, and /boot/efi is owned by 'root', 
as are directories /boot/efi/EFI and /boot/efi/System and file 
/boot/efi/mach_kernel. Drilling a little bit further directories 
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT and /boot/efi/EFI/fedora are also owned by root, 
as is directory /boot/efi/System/Library, so I'm assuming everything is.


Sorry for not being more clear.  I mean owned in the rpm way.  If you 
do "rpm -qf /path/to/file" it will tell you which package put the file 
(or directory) there.


I'm not concerned so much by the space that structure is using, but 
more just querying why it is there, and, if I happen to delete that 
structure will that cause any problems, or, if I do delete it is 
something going to put it back?


If you don't have an EFI system, then deleting those files shouldn't 
make any difference.  But I'm curious, since you actually have files 
in there, can you check what package owns them as described above?


I've issued the command rpm -qf /boot/efi and it tells me it was owned 
by fwupdate-efi-10-1.fc27.x86_64.


I've also issue the command rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubenv and 
that is owned by grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


The command rpm -qf /boot/efi/mach_kernel tells me it is owned by 
mactel-boot-0.9-16.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/grubx64.efi says it is owned by 
grub2-efi-x64-2.02-19.fc27.x86_64.


rpm -qf /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/shim.efi says it is owned by 
shim-x64-13-0.7.x86_64.


I haven't issued the command against the other .efi files in the fedora 
sudirectory, but from their names I would assume they are owned by 
multiple different packages. The thing that sticks out with these .efi 
files in the fedora directory is that fwupia32.efi and fwupx64.efi are 
executable by owner which is root, but grubx64.efi is world executable, 
and, those 3 files are the only ones of the 8 .efi files present that 
are executable.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/10/2018 04:27 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:

On 10/2/18 5:46 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/09/2018 09:40 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. Since
it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are in UEFI
boot mode at the time of install.


What's in yours?  Are any of the files owned?  Mine is just an empty 
directory tree to /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/.  I just checked further and 
that directory is owned by grub-common, but not the parent directories.


I've just checked my efi directory, and /boot/efi is owned by 'root', as 
are directories /boot/efi/EFI and /boot/efi/System and file 
/boot/efi/mach_kernel. Drilling a little bit further directories 
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT and /boot/efi/EFI/fedora are also owned by root, as 
is directory /boot/efi/System/Library, so I'm assuming everything is.


Sorry for not being more clear.  I mean owned in the rpm way.  If you do 
"rpm -qf /path/to/file" it will tell you which package put the file (or 
directory) there.


I'm not concerned so much by the space that structure is using, but more 
just querying why it is there, and, if I happen to delete that structure 
will that cause any problems, or, if I do delete it is something going 
to put it back?


If you don't have an EFI system, then deleting those files shouldn't 
make any difference.  But I'm curious, since you actually have files in 
there, can you check what package owns them as described above?

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Francis . Montagnac]

Hi.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2018 12:07:50 +1100 Stephen Morris wrote:

> Just some info on this. The original format of your grub menu, being one 
> line per kernel, was probably coming from grubby. When kernel installs 
> are done, the install process runs grubby by default to build grub.cfg 
> and update the mbr (in a non-efi system) and grubby builds grub.cfg with 
> a line per kernel. I don't like that format so after every kernel 
> install I manually run grub2-mkconfig and grub2-install to get the menu 
> with a single line for the current kernel and and Advanced sub-menu for 
> the other kernels.

You can make that automatic by adding a script in

  /etc/kernel/postinst.d/

to call grub2-mkconfig -o ...

grub2-install is not needed I think.

-- 
francis
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 7/7/17 2:25 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 07/03/2017 09:58 AM, William Mattison wrote:

Which is best:
1. completely remove the "video=vesa:off" from the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX 
line,

or
2. change the "off" to "on" in that line?


Just remove it.  Are you using the proprietary NVidia driver?  Is that 
why you have all the blacklisting?


I am running the nvidia proprietary driver as provided from the 
negativo17 repositories rather than rpmfusion, and the installation of 
that driver does insert the nouveau blacklisting options (I think this 
is a work-around to having to remove the nouveau driver from the 
initramfs file as the two can't co-exist), but I also have 
gfxpayload=vga=1600x1200x32 manually specified as well to control the 
resolution that grub is using when it displays its menu.



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 3/7/17 12:43 pm, William Mattison wrote:

That solved the more important part of the problem.  The grub menu has an entry 
for the correct, current kernel, and it boots the correct current kernel.  
Thank-you, Sam.


Just some info on this. The original format of your grub menu, being one 
line per kernel, was probably coming from grubby. When kernel installs 
are done, the install process runs grubby by default to build grub.cfg 
and update the mbr (in a non-efi system) and grubby builds grub.cfg with 
a line per kernel. I don't like that format so after every kernel 
install I manually run grub2-mkconfig and grub2-install to get the menu 
with a single line for the current kernel and and Advanced sub-menu for 
the other kernels. This implements the same structure for Ubuntu with I 
boot into as well as Windows 10.



regards,

Steve




On May 19, I started a thread called "ACPI errors (was: f24 boot fails; need 
help)".  The error messages that I reported there showed up during the boot process 
as well as in the journalctl log.  For a while in June, they showed up during the boot 
process in a small font.  Now they show up in a big font.  That's an example of what I'm 
wanting to display in a small font.  This would allow more of the line (and more lines) 
to fit on the screen.  Since they showed up in a small font for a while last month, it 
must be possible.  Here's my /etc/default/grub file:
---
GRUB_TIMEOUT=10
GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR="$(sed 's, release .*$,,g' /etc/system-release)"
GRUB_DEFAULT=saved
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="rd.md=0 rd.lvm=0 rd.dm=0  rd.luks=0 vconsole.keymap=us rhgb 
quiet nouveau.modeset=0 rd.driver.blacklist=nouveau video=vesa:off 
modprobe.blacklist=nouveau"
#GRUB_DISABLE_RECOVERY="true"
GRUB_THEME="/boot/grub2/themes/system/theme.txt"
GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
---
Any ideas?

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 10/2/18 5:46 pm, Samuel Sieb wrote:

On 02/09/2018 09:40 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. Since
it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are in UEFI
boot mode at the time of install.


What's in yours?  Are any of the files owned?  Mine is just an empty 
directory tree to /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/.  I just checked further and 
that directory is owned by grub-common, but not the parent directories.


I've just checked my efi directory, and /boot/efi is owned by 'root', as 
are directories /boot/efi/EFI and /boot/efi/System and file 
/boot/efi/mach_kernel. Drilling a little bit further directories 
/boot/efi/EFI/BOOT and /boot/efi/EFI/fedora are also owned by root, as 
is directory /boot/efi/System/Library, so I'm assuming everything is.


I'm not concerned so much by the space that structure is using, but more 
just querying why it is there, and, if I happen to delete that structure 
will that cause any problems, or, if I do delete it is something going 
to put it back?



regards,

Steve



___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/09/2018 09:40 AM, Rick Stevens wrote:

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. Since
it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are in UEFI
boot mode at the time of install.


What's in yours?  Are any of the files owned?  Mine is just an empty 
directory tree to /boot/efi/EFI/fedora/.  I just checked further and 
that directory is owned by grub-common, but not the parent directories.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Rick Stevens]

On 02/08/2018 10:13 PM, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 02/08/2018 01:44 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
>> Just as a slightly off topic question regarding /boot, in /boot I have
>> an efi sub-directory. Why is this when I am booting Fedora 27, Ubuntu
>> 17.10 and Windows 10 with the bios configured as legacy mode and
>> Ubuntu doesn't have an efi directory in /boot, nor have I installed
>> Fedora 27 as efi?
> 
> That's a good question.  I have that as well on a laptop that doesn't
> even support EFI.  That directory isn't owned by anything either.  This
> laptop has been through a lot of Fedora releases though, so maybe that
> directory was created by a previous release.

IIRC, /boot/efi/* is created by the initial anaconda install sequence
and is in place in case you use UEFI at some point in the future. Since
it's only about 15MB in size, it's pretty innocuous and I wouldn't
worry about it. Ubuntu's install mechanism isn't the same and it
probably doesn't create that directory unless it notices you are in UEFI
boot mode at the time of install.

Which is better? I sorta like Fedora...it's there in case you need it
and it really doesn't take up much space. Your browser cache probably
sucks up more disk than /boot/efi does.
--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340   Yahoo: origrps2 -
--
- Have you noticed that "human readable" configuration file  -
-  directives are beginning to resemble COBOL code?  -
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/08/2018 01:44 PM, Stephen Morris wrote:
Just as a slightly off topic question regarding /boot, in /boot I have 
an efi sub-directory. Why is this when I am booting Fedora 27, Ubuntu 
17.10 and Windows 10 with the bios configured as legacy mode and Ubuntu 
doesn't have an efi directory in /boot, nor have I installed Fedora 27 
as efi?


That's a good question.  I have that as well on a laptop that doesn't 
even support EFI.  That directory isn't owned by anything either.  This 
laptop has been through a lot of Fedora releases though, so maybe that 
directory was created by a previous release.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Stephen Morris]

On 28/6/17 11:52 am, stan wrote:

On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:35:18 -
"William Mattison"  wrote:


(replying to all three messages)

When I boot, the bios display says it is UEFI.  Am I
mis-understanding what that means?  Am I mis-using the term?

Your system supports efi, but it seems you aren't using it.
Just as a slightly off topic question regarding /boot, in /boot I have 
an efi sub-directory. Why is this when I am booting Fedora 27, Ubuntu 
17.10 and Windows 10 with the bios configured as legacy mode and Ubuntu 
doesn't have an efi directory in /boot, nor have I installed Fedora 27 
as efi?



My /boot directory has only two sub-directories: "grub" and "grub2",
no sub-directory "efi".

Not sure why this is.  The fact that you have a grub directory implies
to me that you have been upgrading this system for a while.  I don't
have a grub directory in /boot, since it is legacy and deprecated.


Each of the two sub-directories has a file called "grub.cfg".  The
two files are identical, except for permissions.

In /etc/fstab, the UUIDs are already correct, based on output by both
the blkid command and the lsblk command (which blkid's man page says
I really should use instead).

Confirming Joe's comment.


I tried the grub2-mkconfig command in both sub-directories.  Then I
rebooted.  The new menu has Fedora, other Fedora options, Windows 7
(on /dev/sda1), and Windows 7 (on /dev/sda2).  Each option appears to
boot up correctly, though I did not attempt to actually log in to a
windows account.

It appears to have worked.


Why are there two menu entries for windows?  On this system, sda1 is
the master boot record, sda2 is the windows partition.


I am tri-booting Fedora 27, Ubuntu 17.10 and Windows 10 via grub2. I use 
grub2-mkconfig to get the menu boot list via /boot/grub2/grub.cfg and 
then grub2-install /dev/sda to get the menu into the mbr (you don't 
issue the grub2-install command on an efi system as I understand it). 
This gives me an entry in the menu for the Fedora 27 current kernel, a 
Fedora 27 Advanced sub-menu, a single entry for Windows 10, an entry for 
the Ubuntu current kernel and an Ubuntu Advanced sub-menu. Windows has a 
system partition and the normal windows partition, but the grub invoked 
processes that auto detect the available operating systems ignore the 
Windows System partition, so if you are getting entries for Windows on 
sda and sda2, then presumably the operating system detector has actually 
found two windows partitions on /dev/sda.



regards,

Steve



I don't think the MBR is given a partition assignment.  I don't run
windows, so I'm unfamiliar with how it is organized, but I seem to
recall reading that it can have a backup partition, so one of them
might be that.


After signing in to Fedora, I get a crash message saying vmlinuz
crashed.  I couldn't catch the whole message.  Yet the system does
seem to work.  What's going on?

Try reinstalling the latest kernel, or booting an older kernel.  Are
there any other messages that would indicate the problem in journalctl
-b?  It seems that the kernel is having a problem, but it is not
fatal.  Something misconfigured?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William]

on Monday, July 10, Rick Stevens wrote:

> I'd suggest booting your system using a live CD (which will use nouveau)
> and see how it behaves. If it's OK, then simply comment out your
> blacklist stuff and rebuild grub to go back to nouveau.

After getting the system to boot from the May failures, I was quick to:
1. back up user data,
2. upgrade from f24 to f25, and
3. make an f25 live USB stick.

A week after recovery from the May problems, I discovered the hard drive 
was failing.  For a few days, I used the F25 live USB so I could 
minimize use of the hard drive until the new drive arrived and I could 
get the old one cloned, and get the new one installed.  With the live 
USB, screen resolution was coarse, and I experienced freeze-ups.  So the 
test that was suggested has been tried.  Nouveau did poorly.  That 
coupled with Francois Patte's thread tell me to stick with the nVidia 
proprietary driver.


thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Rick Stevens]

On 07/07/2017 07:07 PM, William wrote:
> On Friday, July 07, Rick Stevens wrote:
> 
>> Ye gods! That was a LONG time ago.
> 
> It took me a few hours of groping around to find that thread!
> 
>> Nouveau has gotten better. It just didn't work well on some
>> chipsets way back when dinosaurs walked the earth.
> 
> Should I stick with the nVidia proprietary driver or switch back to the
> Nouveau driver, or does it not really matter?  The only hardware that
> has changed on my workstation is the hard drive.

Depends. Ideally you'd go with nouveau since that's what's supported
natively with Fedora, but it may still have issues with your hardware
or may not offer some features (e.g. 3D acceleration). I'd suggest
booting your system using a live CD (which will use nouveau) and see how
it behaves. If it's OK, then simply comment out your blacklist stuff and
rebuild grub to go back to nouveau.

> As best as I can determine, the file in which those GRUB_ lines appear
> is merely a text file read by "grub2-mkconfig" and/or "grub2-install" to
> make scripts used early in the boot process.  Thus my suspicion that
> order does not matter, except for the two lines that Sam suggested to me
> in an earlier message in this thread.

I'm not 100% sure if that script is integrated into the actual grub.cfg
file or if it's actually read early in the boot process to override what
grub.cfg does. The important thing is that the variables are defined
before they're used, just like any bash script.
--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340   Yahoo: origrps2 -
--
-Huked on foniks reely wurked for me!-
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William]

on Friday, July 08, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> I would recommend trying out the nouveau driver.  If it works for 
you, then you will
> have a lot less trouble than dealing with the proprietary driver. 
Although if you do
> switch back now, you will have to figure out how to clean up the mess 
left by it.


It was an almost-funny coincidence that the very next posting in this 
list was Francois Patte saying that the nouveau driver was causing his 
system to have the same sorts of problems that I had back in 2013, 
causing me to switch to the proprietary nVidia driver at that time! 
I've been watching for Rick Stevens to chime in on that new thread; he 
was a great help to me on that problem in 2013.  If Francois's new 
thread had not shown up, I would try going back to the nouveau driver. 
But now I think it unwise.


thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 07/07/2017 07:07 PM, William wrote:
Should I stick with the nVidia proprietary driver or switch back to the 
Nouveau driver, or does it not really matter?  The only hardware that 
has changed on my workstation is the hard drive.


I would recommend trying out the nouveau driver.  If it works for you, 
then you will have a lot less trouble than dealing with the proprietary 
driver.  Although if you do switch back now, you will have to figure out 
how to clean up the mess left by it.


As best as I can determine, the file in which those GRUB_ lines appear 
is merely a text file read by "grub2-mkconfig" and/or "grub2-install" to 
make scripts used early in the boot process.  Thus my suspicion that 
order does not matter, except for the two lines that Sam suggested to me 
in an earlier message in this thread.


I think those are only used by grub2-mkconfig to create the grub.cfg file.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William]

On Friday, July 07, Rick Stevens wrote:

> Ye gods! That was a LONG time ago.

It took me a few hours of groping around to find that thread!

> Nouveau has gotten better. It just didn't work well on some
> chipsets way back when dinosaurs walked the earth.

Should I stick with the nVidia proprietary driver or switch back to the 
Nouveau driver, or does it not really matter?  The only hardware that 
has changed on my workstation is the hard drive.


As best as I can determine, the file in which those GRUB_ lines appear 
is merely a text file read by "grub2-mkconfig" and/or "grub2-install" to 
make scripts used early in the boot process.  Thus my suspicion that 
order does not matter, except for the two lines that Sam suggested to me 
in an earlier message in this thread.


thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Rick Stevens]

On 07/07/2017 02:55 PM, William wrote:
> On Thursday, July 06, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> 
>> Just remove it.  Are you using the proprietary NVidia driver? Is that
> why you have all the blacklisting?
> 
> Neither removing it nor changing "off" to "on made any difference that I
> saw.
> 
> Back in September, 2013, I opened a thread "problem: system freezes" in
> this list.  What solved the problem was Rick Stevens' suggestion to
> replace the "nouveau" graphics card driver for my nVidia graphics card
> with the "nVidia binary driver".  Using the commands that Rick gave me
> back then, I check what's being used now:
> 
> bash.2[~]: lsmod | grep -i nouveau
> bash.3[~]: lsmod | grep -i nvidia
> nvidia_drm 49152  1
> nvidia_modeset790528  4 nvidia_drm
> nvidia  12308480  68 nvidia_modeset
> drm_kms_helper151552  1 nvidia_drm
> drm   348160  4 nvidia_drm,drm_kms_helper
> bash.4[~]:
> 
> So yes, I'm using the proprietary nVidia driver.

Ye gods! That was a LONG time ago. Nouveau has gotten better. It just
didn't work well on some chipsets way back when dinosaurs walked the
earth.

> The blacklisting is not my doing.  I don't know why it's there, or if it
> should be there.  But it does seem consistent with my system using the
> nvidia proprietary driver.

 I think that's why the blacklisting is
there--to make sure you didn't use nouveau. That may be a moot point
now.

That's why it's handy to have a bootable USB drive around...to test
stuff like this out. Install to the USB drive using defaults (like
nouveau) and boot it. Does nouveau handle the hardware properly now?

> Does it matter that
> 
> GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
> GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
> GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
> 
> come after the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX line in the /etc/default/grub file? 
> I'm guessing it does not matter, but I'd like that confirmed by someone
> a lot more knowledgeable about these things than am I. I'm highly
> uncomfortable playing with something as critical as grub.

They're just shell variables that get exported by grub. They _must_ be
defined before they're referenced via any "$(GRUB_x)" directives.
Like any shell script, if you reference a non-existent variable, you'll
get an error.

It's unlikely your GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX definition references those so
any order should be OK. Just double check that they're defined before
they're used. If they're not referenced elsewhere in the file, you're
probably fine in any order.
--
- Rick Stevens, Systems Engineer, AllDigitalri...@alldigital.com -
- AIM/Skype: therps2ICQ: 226437340   Yahoo: origrps2 -
--
- Adjectives in English absolutely must come in the following order: -
- opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose Noun. So you  -
-   can have a "lovely, little old rectangular green French silver   -
- whittling knife". But if you mess with that order in the   -
-   slightest, you'll sound like a maniac. It is an odd thing that   -
-  almost every English speaker uses that order, but almost none of  -
-   us could write it out. And, as size comes before color, "green   -
-great dragons" can't exist. However, we all know that "great-
-  green dragons" do.-
--
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William]

On Thursday, July 06, Samuel Sieb wrote:

> Just remove it.  Are you using the proprietary NVidia driver? Is that 
why you have all the blacklisting?


Neither removing it nor changing "off" to "on made any difference that I 
saw.


Back in September, 2013, I opened a thread "problem: system freezes" in 
this list.  What solved the problem was Rick Stevens' suggestion to 
replace the "nouveau" graphics card driver for my nVidia graphics card 
with the "nVidia binary driver".  Using the commands that Rick gave me 
back then, I check what's being used now:


bash.2[~]: lsmod | grep -i nouveau
bash.3[~]: lsmod | grep -i nvidia
nvidia_drm 49152  1
nvidia_modeset790528  4 nvidia_drm
nvidia  12308480  68 nvidia_modeset
drm_kms_helper151552  1 nvidia_drm
drm   348160  4 nvidia_drm,drm_kms_helper
bash.4[~]:

So yes, I'm using the proprietary nVidia driver.

The blacklisting is not my doing.  I don't know why it's there, or if it 
should be there.  But it does seem consistent with my system using the 
nvidia proprietary driver.


Does it matter that

GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep

come after the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX line in the /etc/default/grub file?  
I'm guessing it does not matter, but I'd like that confirmed by someone 
a lot more knowledgeable about these things than am I. I'm highly 
uncomfortable playing with something as critical as grub.


thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 07/03/2017 09:58 AM, William Mattison wrote:

Which is best:
1. completely remove the "video=vesa:off" from the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX line,
or
2. change the "off" to "on" in that line?


Just remove it.  Are you using the proprietary NVidia driver?  Is that 
why you have all the blacklisting?

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu? [SOLVED]

[William]

Good evening,

Neither changing nor removing the "video=" part of the /etc/default/grub 
file had any effect.  But the bigness of the font in the real-time boot 
log display is a cosmetic issue.  The grub menu is now as it should be, 
and the system boots correctly.  That was the real issue.  So I consider 
this issue solved.


I thank everyone who tried to help.  This home user could not have done 
it without you.


Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

Which is best:
1. completely remove the "video=vesa:off" from the GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX line,
or
2. change the "off" to "on" in that line?
I would not be surprised if it could make it significant difference.

The font used in the grub menu and the grub shell has been a good size all 
along, and has not changed.  The only changes I made to the grub file are those 
that you advised.  Everything else in that file, including that 
"video=vesa:off", is either "factory settings", or put there last month by 
"Boot-Repair-Disk", or put there by the quasi-weekly "dnf upgrade" run, or put 
there by the quasi-semi-annual upgrade from f[n] to f[n+1].

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 07/02/2017 07:43 PM, William Mattison wrote:

On May 19, I started a thread called "ACPI errors (was: f24 boot fails; need 
help)".  The error messages that I reported there showed up during the boot process 
as well as in the journalctl log.  For a while in June, they showed up during the boot 
process in a small font.  Now they show up in a big font.  That's an example of what I'm 
wanting to display in a small font.  This would allow more of the line (and more lines) 
to fit on the screen.  Since they showed up in a small font for a while last month, it 
must be possible.  Here's my /etc/default/grub file:
---
GRUB_TIMEOUT=10
GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR="$(sed 's, release .*$,,g' /etc/system-release)"
GRUB_DEFAULT=saved
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="rd.md=0 rd.lvm=0 rd.dm=0  rd.luks=0 vconsole.keymap=us rhgb 
quiet nouveau.modeset=0 rd.driver.blacklist=nouveau video=vesa:off 
modprobe.blacklist=nouveau"
#GRUB_DISABLE_RECOVERY="true"
GRUB_THEME="/boot/grub2/themes/system/theme.txt"
GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
---
Any ideas?


Is that what you had in the file before?  I expect that those settings 
will force the kernel to use real text mode with the standard 80x25 
characters when booting instead of switching to a graphical console 
where it can use a smaller font.  Why do you have the "video=vesa:off" 
parameter?  Is the grub font different now than it was before as well?

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

That solved the more important part of the problem.  The grub menu has an entry 
for the correct, current kernel, and it boots the correct current kernel.  
Thank-you, Sam.

On May 19, I started a thread called "ACPI errors (was: f24 boot fails; need 
help)".  The error messages that I reported there showed up during the boot 
process as well as in the journalctl log.  For a while in June, they showed up 
during the boot process in a small font.  Now they show up in a big font.  
That's an example of what I'm wanting to display in a small font.  This would 
allow more of the line (and more lines) to fit on the screen.  Since they 
showed up in a small font for a while last month, it must be possible.  Here's 
my /etc/default/grub file:
---
GRUB_TIMEOUT=10
GRUB_DISTRIBUTOR="$(sed 's, release .*$,,g' /etc/system-release)"
GRUB_DEFAULT=saved
GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX="rd.md=0 rd.lvm=0 rd.dm=0  rd.luks=0 vconsole.keymap=us rhgb 
quiet nouveau.modeset=0 rd.driver.blacklist=nouveau video=vesa:off 
modprobe.blacklist=nouveau"
#GRUB_DISABLE_RECOVERY="true"
GRUB_THEME="/boot/grub2/themes/system/theme.txt"
GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
---
Any ideas?

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 06/30/2017 06:50 PM, William Mattison wrote:

I did what was advised.  Still no change.  But I think there is a more fundamental 
problem here.  The grub on my system came from"Boot-Repair-Disk", on a live-usb 
stick, not from any dnf install from a Fedora repository.  So if Fedora's grub is 
customized or specialized in some way, I don't have that.


You might have found the problem there.  Try running "grub2-install 
/dev/sda" and see if that makes a difference.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Samuel Sieb]

On 06/28/2017 08:33 PM, William Mattison wrote:

I believe Stan is correct.  I built this system 4+ years ago.  At that time, it 
was my understanding that to get a windows-7 and Fedora dual-boot system, I had 
to install windows-7 first.  I think that at that time, windows-7 did not 
support UEFI.  Though I did not explicitly make it so, the windows-7 install 
made this a non-UEFI (old BIOS?) system.  My sense is that that in turn forced 
the Fedora install to use the old BIOS.  I don't recall having any choice in 
that.  My sense is that for me to now try to convert this home system to UEFI 
would mean a total re-install of both Fedora and windows-7.  (Am I correct?)  
Remembering how much trouble I had with this 4+ years ago, and being a home 
user, not a sys-admin, I fear such a conversion would take days, and wouldn't 
really gain me anything.


If it's working now, then no, there's unlikely to be any benefit, but a 
lot of work to change it over, especially for windows.



Questions:  When doing my windows patches and scans today, windows 
automatically downloaded and installed a new device driver for the new hard 
drive.  Do I need to do that in Fedora?  Did Fedora automatically do that 
already?  How do I check?


That could just be the Windows message for "something changed".  The new 
hard drive is a different brand or different model, so Windows was just 
updating it's internal records.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

Good evening,

I did what was advised.  Still no change.  But I think there is a more 
fundamental problem here.  The grub on my system came from"Boot-Repair-Disk", 
on a live-usb stick, not from any dnf install from a Fedora repository.  So if 
Fedora's grub is customized or specialized in some way, I don't have that.

This shows that the grub.cfg file is getting updated by grub2-mkconfig:
bash.8[grub2]: ls -l /etc/default/grub 

-rw-r--r--. 1 root root 463 Jun 30 18:34 /etc/default/grub
bash.9[grub2]: ls -l grub.cfg 
-rw---. 1 root root 14507 Jun 30 18:37 grub.cfg
bash.10[grub2]: 

The title at the top og GRUB's script-editing window reads "GNU GRUB version 
2.02~beta3-5".

The grub.cfg file has these lines for the first grub menu entry:

### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/10_linux ###
menuentry 'Fedora (4.11.6-201.fc25.x86_64) 25 (Twenty Five)' --class fedora 
--class gnu-linux --class gnu --class os --unrestricted $menuentry_id_option 
'gnulinux-4.11.6-201.fc25.x86_64-advanced-45e553d2-fa0c-4eae-95f6-7bf9086ab74c' 
{
load_video
set gfxpayload=keep
insmod gzio
insmod part_msdos
insmod ext2
set root='hd0,msdos3'
if [ x$feature_platform_search_hint = xy ]; then
  search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set=root --hint-bios=hd0,msdos3 
--hint-efi=hd0,msdos3 --hint-baremetal=ahci0,msdos3 --hint='hd0,msdos3'  
c6db3d91-f891-48a2-ae61-28ad5cc9c3a6
else
  search --no-floppy --fs-uuid --set=root 
c6db3d91-f891-48a2-ae61-28ad5cc9c3a6
fi
linux16 /vmlinuz-4.11.6-201.fc25.x86_64 
root=UUID=45e553d2-fa0c-4eae-95f6-7bf9086ab74c ro rd.md=0 rd.lvm=0 rd.dm=0  
rd.luks=0 vconsole.keymap=us rhgb quiet nouveau.modeset=0 
rd.driver.blacklist=nouveau video=vesa:off modprobe.blacklist=nouveau
initrd16 /initramfs-4.11.6-201.fc25.x86_64.img
}


But when I reboot, the grub menu shows up, the first entry simply says 
"Fedora".  When "Fedora" is highlighted, and I hit the 'e' key, a script 
editing window appears.  In that script, the numbers for vmlinuz and initramfs 
are 4.11.5, not 4.11.6.

And I do have version4.11.6 of the kernel, though it's version 4.11.5 that's 
being booted:

bash.11[grub2]: dnf list kernel
Last metadata expiration check: 3:20:59 ago on Fri Jun 30 16:16:09 2017.
Installed Packages
kernel.x86_64 
4.11.4-200.fc25 @updates
kernel.x86_64 
4.11.5-200.fc25 @updates
kernel.x86_64 
4.11.6-201.fc25 @updates
Available Packages
kernel.x86_64 
4.11.7-200.fc25 updates 
bash.12[grub2]: uname -a
Linux coyote 4.11.5-200.fc25.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed Jun 14 17:17:29 UTC 2017 x86_64 
x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
bash.13[grub2]:


From all the above, my sense is that something more fundamental is wrong.  
What, I don't know.

Earlier today, as suggested by this list's guidelines, I created a Fedora 
People account so I could have a place to post things (logs, files, screen 
captures, etc.) for members of this list to view.  But when I do the ssh 
command to connect, all I get is "permission denied".  I was hoping to put a 
few files out there for you to examine for better clues.  I'm guessing that 
that will now have to wait until after the Independence Day holiday.

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 04:29:12 -
"William Mattison"  wrote:

> > Add the entry 
> > GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=y
> > to the /etc/default/grub file.  
> 
> That made no difference.  Then I did "grub2-mkconfig".  Still no
> difference.

Try GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=true
The documentation could be out of date.  That's what's in
my /etc/default/grub file, and I commented it out in order to get the
style of grub.cfg *with* submenus, and that worked.  You do have to
regenerate the grub.cfg file in order for these settings to take effect,
and you have to do it in the /boot/grub2 directory with the -o command,
grub2-mkconfig -o grub.cfg
You probably did it this way, but it isn't clear to me from your
description, so I thought I'd say it again.

> > Try adding the entry 
> > GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=text
> > to the /etc/default/grub file.  You might have to play with this a
> > little.  To examine the possibilities look in the documentation for
> > grub2 options about GFX using
> > pinfo grub2  
> 
> I couldn't find anything about GFX, GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX, or
> GFXPAYLOAD in the pinfo output.  I found some documentation in the
> GNU GRUB web site.  Based on that, I tried "auto" on the right side
> of the '='.  No difference, even after re-running grub2-mkconfig.
> It's not the text in the grub menu or the grub shell that I'm trying
> to change.  It's the text of the boot logging that shows up after the
> grub menu goes away (times out), or after I hit the enter key to
> select "Fedora" for booting.  Is that what GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX
> controls?  The GNU documentation gave no examples (that I saw) of
> what to put on the right side of the '='.  What goes there?

All of these settings are under Configuration -> Simple Configuration
from the main menu for pinfo grub2.  If I understand what you are saying
correctly, yes, that is what GFXPAYLOAD controls.

If you changed those in the /etc/default/grub file, and ran the above
command again, and it didn't change the boot messages, then that
isn't the setting you need.  Try, order matters,
GRUB_GFXMODE=1920x1080,1600x900,1280x720,1024x576,auto
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=keep
The early boot is problematic because the video modes available to
grub2 are restricted, so you might not be able to get what you want
there.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

> Add the entry 
> GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=y
> to the /etc/default/grub file.

That made no difference.  Then I did "grub2-mkconfig".  Still no difference.

> Try adding the entry 
> GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=text
> to the /etc/default/grub file.  You might have to play with this a
> little.  To examine the possibilities look in the documentation for
> grub2 options about GFX using
> pinfo grub2

I couldn't find anything about GFX, GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX, or GFXPAYLOAD in the 
pinfo output.  I found some documentation in the GNU GRUB web site.  Based on 
that, I tried "auto" on the right side of the '='.  No difference, even after 
re-running grub2-mkconfig.  It's not the text in the grub menu or the grub 
shell that I'm trying to change.  It's the text of the boot logging that shows 
up after the grub menu goes away (times out), or after I hit the enter key to 
select "Fedora" for booting.  Is that what GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX controls?  The 
GNU documentation gave no examples (that I saw) of what to put on the right 
side of the '='.  What goes there?

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:56:05 -
"William Mattison"  wrote:

> Good afternoon,
> 
> I found the login attempts in the journalctl output, though it isn't
> easy.  I'll open a new thread to address what this is really about.
> 
> Before the hard drive replacement, the grub menu showed the three
> most recent Fedora patches, then something like "Advanced options for
> Fedora", then a Windows (or DOS) option.
[snip]
>  How do I get it to be that way?

Add the entry 
GRUB_DISABLE_SUBMENU=y
to the /etc/default/grub file.

PS those are kernels, not patches; each line represents a different
kernel that you can boot with.

> After the grub menu disappears but before the three small whitish
> rectangles appear, some boot logging shows up in a very large font.
> Before doing the "grub2-mkconfig", that logging showed up in a much
> smaller font.  The same is true of logging that shows up after the
> three small rectangles disappear, but before the login GUI shows up.
> How do I get the font for the boot logging to be a small font?

Try adding the entry 
GRUB_GFXPAYLOAD_LINUX=text
to the /etc/default/grub file.  You might have to play with this a
little.  To examine the possibilities look in the documentation for
grub2 options about GFX using
pinfo grub2
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

Good afternoon,

I found the login attempts in the journalctl output, though it isn't easy.  
I'll open a new thread to address what this is really about.

Before the hard drive replacement, the grub menu showed the three most recent 
Fedora patches, then something like "Advanced options for Fedora>", then a 
Windows (or DOS) option.  The menu entries for each of the three most recent 
Fedora patches looked like this:
Fedora (4.11.5-200.fc25.x86_64) 25 (Twenty Five)
but with different numbers.  Now there is only one Fedora option, and it merely 
says "Fedora".  I did my weekly "dnf upgrade" earlier this afternoon, and it 
did update the kernel.  But the grub menu did not visibly change.  I would like 
it the way it was before the hard drive replacement: three Fedora entries 
formatted like the one I showed a few lines above here.  How do I get it to be 
that way?

After the grub menu disappears but before the three small whitish rectangles 
appear, some boot logging shows up in a very large font.  Before doing the 
"grub2-mkconfig", that logging showed up in a much smaller font.  The same is 
true of logging that shows up after the three small rectangles disappear, but 
before the login GUI shows up.  How do I get the font for the boot logging to 
be a small font?

thank-you in advance,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tim]

William Mattison:
>> Questions:  When doing my windows patches and scans today, windows
>> automatically downloaded and installed a new device driver for the new
>> hard drive.  Do I need to do that in Fedora?  Did Fedora automatically
>> do that already?  How do I check? 

Tim:
> Most likely, that would be for resolving some problem with the prior
> Windows driver for that device.  Much less likely, it could be to deal
> with a problem with the hard drive itself, that someone modified the
> Windows driver to workaround.
> 
> I'm far more inclined to believe that it's the first reason.  Different
> systems release patches all the time, just because one OS finds a
> problem with their own code doesn't mean that a different one will have
> the same problem.  Unless, the other one made their code by copying
> ideas from someone else's bad code.

Supplementary:  If the updated driver was for a specific drive (it's
named for a brand/model by name), I might believe it was the second
issue.  But it's much more likely to be a driver for the hard drive
interface on the computer motherboard.

Most internal hard drive drivers are for the interface, related to the
chipset involved (SiS, NVidia, et cetera - yes NVidia make more than
graphics chips).  And external hard drives drivers (such as USB ones),
are probable more for the external interface (the enclosure), rather
than the actual disc drive.


-- 
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64 
(always current details of the computer that I'm writing this email on)

Boilerplate:  All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.

When it comes to electronics, I'm slightly biased.


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 03:33:05 -
"William Mattison"  wrote:

> Good evening,
> 
> I believe Stan is correct.  I built this system 4+ years ago.  At
> that time, it was my understanding that to get a windows-7 and Fedora
> dual-boot system, I had to install windows-7 first.  I think that at
> that time, windows-7 did not support UEFI.  Though I did not
> explicitly make it so, the windows-7 install made this a non-UEFI
> (old BIOS?) system.  My sense is that that in turn forced the Fedora
> install to use the old BIOS.  I don't recall having any choice in
> that.  My sense is that for me to now try to convert this home system
> to UEFI would mean a total re-install of both Fedora and windows-7.
> (Am I correct?)  Remembering how much trouble I had with this 4+
> years ago, and being a home user, not a sys-admin, I fear such a
> conversion would take days, and wouldn't really gain me anything.

I agree.  I don't know the procedure to switch over, though EFI
requires a larger reserved area at the start of the hard drive, so you
would at least have to change the layout of your drive.  I think that
EFI is more secure if you are using a mobile device, but for a home
user of a desktop it probably provides little benefit.

> Questions:  When doing my windows patches and scans today, windows
> automatically downloaded and installed a new device driver for the
> new hard drive.  Do I need to do that in Fedora?  Did Fedora
> automatically do that already?  How do I check?

I think Tim has the right of it in his answer.  Every time you update
your kernel in Fedora, you update your drivers with any changes that
have been made to them.  It's possible that the vendor has proprietary
enhancements in the windows driver specific to the drive.  Those might
or might not be in the linux driver, depending on whether they have
been reverse engineered.  They won't affect standard SATA
functionality, they will probably be for windows specific reporting for
performance statistics via vendor supplied windows software.

> I saw no indication of vmlinuz crashes in the "journalctl -b"
> output.  I also haven't seen any more vmlinuz crash messages.  I'll
> keep watching.  I'll be doing the weekly "dnf upgrade" tomorrow;
> maybe that will fix any problems that do exist.
> 
> What log file shows me all attempts to sign in to this system
> regardless whether they're local or remote, and regardless whether
> they were successful or not?  And where is that log file?

Do a 
journalctl -r  
and then search for the phrase LOGIN ON
/LOGIN ON

The journal files are all under /var/log/journal, but they are not
human readable.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Tim]

Allegedly, on or about 29 June 2017, William Mattison sent:
> Questions:  When doing my windows patches and scans today, windows
> automatically downloaded and installed a new device driver for the new
> hard drive.  Do I need to do that in Fedora?  Did Fedora automatically
> do that already?  How do I check? 

Most likely, that would be for resolving some problem with the prior
Windows driver for that device.  Much less likely, it could be to deal
with a problem with the hard drive itself, that someone modified the
Windows driver to workaround.

I'm far more inclined to believe that it's the first reason.  Different
systems release patches all the time, just because one OS finds a
problem with their own code doesn't mean that a different one will have
the same problem.  Unless, the other one made their code by copying
ideas from someone else's bad code.

-- 
[tim@localhost ~]$ uname -rsvp
Linux 3.9.10-100.fc17.x86_64 #1 SMP Sun Jul 14 01:31:27 UTC 2013 x86_64 
(always current details of the computer that I'm writing this email on)

Boilerplate:  All mail to my mailbox is automatically deleted, there is
no point trying to privately email me, I only get to see the messages
posted to the mailing list.

Using Windows software is like coating all your handtools with sewage.


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

Good evening,

I believe Stan is correct.  I built this system 4+ years ago.  At that time, it 
was my understanding that to get a windows-7 and Fedora dual-boot system, I had 
to install windows-7 first.  I think that at that time, windows-7 did not 
support UEFI.  Though I did not explicitly make it so, the windows-7 install 
made this a non-UEFI (old BIOS?) system.  My sense is that that in turn forced 
the Fedora install to use the old BIOS.  I don't recall having any choice in 
that.  My sense is that for me to now try to convert this home system to UEFI 
would mean a total re-install of both Fedora and windows-7.  (Am I correct?)  
Remembering how much trouble I had with this 4+ years ago, and being a home 
user, not a sys-admin, I fear such a conversion would take days, and wouldn't 
really gain me anything.

Questions:  When doing my windows patches and scans today, windows 
automatically downloaded and installed a new device driver for the new hard 
drive.  Do I need to do that in Fedora?  Did Fedora automatically do that 
already?  How do I check?

I saw no indication of vmlinuz crashes in the "journalctl -b" output.  I also 
haven't seen any more vmlinuz crash messages.  I'll keep watching.  I'll be 
doing the weekly "dnf upgrade" tomorrow; maybe that will fix any problems that 
do exist.

What log file shows me all attempts to sign in to this system regardless 
whether they're local or remote, and regardless whether they were successful or 
not?  And where is that log file?

Bill, here's my fdisk output:
---
-bash.1[~]: fdisk -l /dev/sda
Disk /dev/sda: 1.8 TiB, 2000398934016 bytes, 3907029168 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 4096 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 4096 bytes / 4096 bytes
Disklabel type: dos
Disk identifier: 0xfde8da65

Device Boot  StartEndSectors   Size Id Type
/dev/sda1  *  2048 206847 204800   100M  7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sda2   206848 1859026943 1858820096 886.4G  7 HPFS/NTFS/exFAT
/dev/sda3   1859026944 18600509431024000   500M 83 Linux
/dev/sda4   1860050944 3907029167 2046978224 976.1G  5 Extended
/dev/sda5   1860052992 1876436991   16384000   7.8G 82 Linux swap / Solaris
/dev/sda6   1876439040 1981296639  10485760050G 83 Linux
/dev/sda7   1981298688 3907028991 1925730304 918.3G 83 Linux
-bash.2[~]: 
---
sda2 is the windows partition, sda6 is the Linux partition, sda7 is Linux 
"/home".

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Bill Shirley]

You might have a look at your partition layout: fdisk -l /dev/sda
Also, your UEFI motherboard could be booting in legacy BIOS mode.

A couple of months back, I had to re-arrange a borked Debian install.  This is a
4 TB Western Digital Black drive on a UEFI motherboard:
[0:root@TUX ~]$ fdisk -l /dev/sda
Disk /dev/sda: 3.7 TiB, 4000787030016 bytes, 7814037168 sectors
Units: sectors of 1 * 512 = 512 bytes
Sector size (logical/physical): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
I/O size (minimum/optimal): 512 bytes / 512 bytes
Disklabel type: gpt
Disk identifier: 170B3F1A-BFD5-4785-B5E8-803B2B036244

Device  StartEndSectors   Size Type
/dev/sda12048   6143   4096 2M BIOS boot
/dev/sda26144   67115007   6710886432G Linux swap
/dev/sda367115008   68114432 999425   488M Microsoft basic data
/dev/sda468116480 7812083341 7743966862   3.6T Linux RAID
/dev/sda5  7812083712 78140371341953423 953.8M Linux filesystem

I don't remember why I had to define /dev/sda3.  I think Debian insisted on it.
If the disk doesn't use EFI, you need the 'BIOS boot' partition.  It only has to
be 1 MB (maybe less) but this was my first time doing this and I wanted to be
sure I didn't have to re-arrange partitions again.  Lots of copying files and
waiting, waiting, waiting.  Breaking mirrors and re-syncing them. Lots of fun.

If you are using it as an EFI disk, you need a different partition other than
the 'BIOS boot' but don't rememer what it is.

HTH,
Bill

On 6/27/2017 9:35 PM, William Mattison wrote:

(replying to all three messages)

When I boot, the bios display says it is UEFI.  Am I mis-understanding what 
that means?  Am I mis-using the term?

My /boot directory has only two sub-directories: "grub" and "grub2", no sub-directory 
"efi".

Each of the two sub-directories has a file called "grub.cfg".  The two files 
are identical, except for permissions.

In /etc/fstab, the UUIDs are already correct, based on output by both the blkid 
command and the lsblk command (which blkid's man page says I really should use 
instead).

I tried the grub2-mkconfig command in both sub-directories.  Then I rebooted.  
The new menu has Fedora, other Fedora options, Windows 7 (on /dev/sda1), and 
Windows 7 (on /dev/sda2).  Each option appears to boot up correctly, though I 
did not attempt to actually log in to a windows account.

Why are there two menu entries for windows?  On this system, sda1 is the master 
boot record, sda2 is the windows partition.

After signing in to Fedora, I get a crash message saying vmlinuz crashed.  I 
couldn't catch the whole message.  Yet the system does seem to work.  What's 
going on?

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org


___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Wed, 28 Jun 2017 01:35:18 -
"William Mattison"  wrote:

> (replying to all three messages)
> 
> When I boot, the bios display says it is UEFI.  Am I
> mis-understanding what that means?  Am I mis-using the term?

Your system supports efi, but it seems you aren't using it.

> 
> My /boot directory has only two sub-directories: "grub" and "grub2",
> no sub-directory "efi".

Not sure why this is.  The fact that you have a grub directory implies
to me that you have been upgrading this system for a while.  I don't
have a grub directory in /boot, since it is legacy and deprecated.

> Each of the two sub-directories has a file called "grub.cfg".  The
> two files are identical, except for permissions.
> 
> In /etc/fstab, the UUIDs are already correct, based on output by both
> the blkid command and the lsblk command (which blkid's man page says
> I really should use instead).

Confirming Joe's comment.

> I tried the grub2-mkconfig command in both sub-directories.  Then I
> rebooted.  The new menu has Fedora, other Fedora options, Windows 7
> (on /dev/sda1), and Windows 7 (on /dev/sda2).  Each option appears to
> boot up correctly, though I did not attempt to actually log in to a
> windows account.

It appears to have worked.

> Why are there two menu entries for windows?  On this system, sda1 is
> the master boot record, sda2 is the windows partition.

I don't think the MBR is given a partition assignment.  I don't run
windows, so I'm unfamiliar with how it is organized, but I seem to
recall reading that it can have a backup partition, so one of them
might be that.  

> 
> After signing in to Fedora, I get a crash message saying vmlinuz
> crashed.  I couldn't catch the whole message.  Yet the system does
> seem to work.  What's going on?

Try reinstalling the latest kernel, or booting an older kernel.  Are
there any other messages that would indicate the problem in journalctl
-b?  It seems that the kernel is having a problem, but it is not
fatal.  Something misconfigured?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[William Mattison]

(replying to all three messages)

When I boot, the bios display says it is UEFI.  Am I mis-understanding what 
that means?  Am I mis-using the term?

My /boot directory has only two sub-directories: "grub" and "grub2", no 
sub-directory "efi".

Each of the two sub-directories has a file called "grub.cfg".  The two files 
are identical, except for permissions.

In /etc/fstab, the UUIDs are already correct, based on output by both the blkid 
command and the lsblk command (which blkid's man page says I really should use 
instead).

I tried the grub2-mkconfig command in both sub-directories.  Then I rebooted.  
The new menu has Fedora, other Fedora options, Windows 7 (on /dev/sda1), and 
Windows 7 (on /dev/sda2).  Each option appears to boot up correctly, though I 
did not attempt to actually log in to a windows account.

Why are there two menu entries for windows?  On this system, sda1 is the master 
boot record, sda2 is the windows partition.

After signing in to Fedora, I get a crash message saying vmlinuz crashed.  I 
couldn't catch the whole message.  Yet the system does seem to work.  What's 
going on?

thanks,
Bill.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 13:16:49 -0700
Joe Zeff  wrote:

> On 06/27/2017 01:05 PM, stan wrote:
> > But, I think you might have to fix the /etc/fstab file also before
> > you do the above. If you cloned the drive, it will still be using
> > the block ids for the previous drive in the /etc/fstab.  
> 
> This is why fstab uses the UUID by default, and you should too.
> Cloning the drive doesn't change those.

Thanks for the correction.  That implies that it is possible to have
duplicate UUIDs on a system if a drive and its duplicate are mounted,
though, doesn't it?  What does the system do at boot in that case?
First come, first serve?

It also means that the only thing William has to do is run the
grub-mkconfig command, which is easier for him.

As a matter of note, I always use the UUID in fstab, and also create
unique labels for each partition.  When I want to duplicate a drive, I
usually use rsync (sometimes cp) with both drives mounted, and
partitions already created on the receiving drive, so the UUIDs, and
labels, will differ on the two drives even though the content might be
identical.

I just looked at blkid output, and I noticed that there are now PARTUUID
and PARTLABEL for drives.  Even when each partition already has a
UUID and a label.  Perhaps this is to deal with the cloning issue, so
there are unique identifiers even for cloned drives?
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[Joe Zeff]

On 06/27/2017 01:05 PM, stan wrote:

But, I think you might have to fix the /etc/fstab file also before you
do the above. If you cloned the drive, it will still be using the block
ids for the previous drive in the /etc/fstab.


This is why fstab uses the UUID by default, and you should too.  Cloning 
the drive doesn't change those.

___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: how to (re-?)construct grub menu?

[stan]

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017 12:12:29 -0600
William  wrote:

> I want the grub menu to offer the three most recent patches of
> Fedora, the most recent Fedora rescue shell, and windows-7, in that
> order. (This is a dual-boot system.)  And I want the shells launched
> by the menu entries to be correct.  How do I get that accomplished -
> the correct Fedora-25 way?  If it matters, the motherboard uses UEFI
> bios.

I'm not sure if it matters as I don't use EFI.  But, there is a program
called grub2-mkconfig that can be used to regenerate the grub.cfg file
in /boot/grub2, and it might work in /boot/efi.  It is in the package
grub2-tools.

cd into the directory /boot/efi and type the command
grub2-mkconfig -o grub.cfg
as root.  That should leave you with a valid grub menu.

But, I think you might have to fix the /etc/fstab file also before you
do the above. If you cloned the drive, it will still be using the block
ids for the previous drive in the /etc/fstab.

Use the command blkid to find the UUIDs of the partitions on the new
drive.  And edit /etc/fstab so they are correct for the / and /boot
partition of your new drive.

Then run the grub2-mkconfig command, and the next boot should give you
the menu you want.

Again, this would work for grub2 boot, but I'm not sure about efi boot.
___
users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org