Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 07:16:33PM +1000, Paul Wise wrote: grub2 doesn't seem to support my current fs (reiser3). What other such regressions are there? Is there a wiki page for this transition yet? I just set up one: http://wiki.debian.org/GrubTransition -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:02:18PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wednesday 25 April 2007 14:59, Otavio Salvador wrote: We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - better codebase; Is grub2 fundamentally different from grub, or is it basically based on the current grub but just developed further? A complete rewrite code. Note that although it's been rebuilt from scratch, there are many specific portions of code (e.g. filesystems, or lib/device.c device pathname resolver) that have been reintegrated into grub2. Do you really mean multi-arch or just supports more architectures? It's been redesigned to isolate arch-specific code, making the port to new arches feasible. Currently it supports i386 (and amd64..), powerpc, and sparc64 is being worked on. Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? It should support. Is difficult to test it without hardware access. This kind of knowlege (about paths to specific devices) used to live in lib/device.c for grub-legacy, and I believe it's all been ported to grub2 (although internaly it's handled very differently). Does grub2 solve any of the issues we currently have with grub? - xfs support Looks like. I wasn't aware of this. Did you try it? - lvm support There has been significant work into this area, including a SoC project which AFAIK is now finished and integrated with CVS. I haven't tried any of this myself, though. More at http://grub.enbug.org/LVMandRAID. - wrong detection of correct boot device in BIOS Can you be more specific? -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Monday 30 April 2007 17:57, Robert Millan wrote: - wrong detection of correct boot device in BIOS Can you be more specific? #265228, #317606, #420376 and others pgp38xpIu8c0N.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:06:07PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
Is anybody else using grub2 as a default bootloader today?
A while before the etch release, I migrated all my etch machines to it. I went
back to grub legacy when we decided that grub2 wasn't going to be included in
etch, but it was perfectly usable for me at that point, and I certainly would
(and will) use it for testing/lenny systems when I setup/upgrade one.
I also know that Jordi Mallach installed it in his (powerpc) laptop, and popcon
speaks of another 71 people who at least have the package in their systems ;-)
Has testing of grub2 explicitly included testing on older x86 systems, given
that we've found that i486 was effectively not tested at all thoroughly
before the etch release (the distro in general, not grub in particular)?
You mean real hardware, or just emulated i486 cpu ?
Hrm. What was wrong with the existing format? :/ Those are the kinds of
upstream changes that are most aggravating for administrators (or at least
for this administrator here :).
Consistency. If you look at it, things make more sense now. E.g. root is
not a command, but a variable. And its scope is properly defined, much like
in C-style root=foo; { root=bar; do_this }; etc.
At least in the case of x86, I'm not sure how that's any different from what
happens with any other upgrade of the bootloader. I guess the grub1 boot
sector is incompatible with grub2, and this is what has to be rewritten on
upgrade?
From this perspective, the only difference is menu.lst syntax. If you just
upgrade the package, next time linux-image-2.6.xx invokes update-grub, it'll
generate /boot/grub/grub.cfg instead of menu.lst, making the change a no-op
untill grub is reloaded to MBR.
Fortunately, grub2 is a multiboot image so grub legacy can chainload to it.
We can make update-grub2 write a menu.lst whose default option runs:
kernel (hdX,Y)/boot/grub/core.img
this makes grub2 operative without mangling the MBR.
Again, if grub2 isn't stable enough to be called 'grub', then I really think
it's not stable enough to be made the default in d-i either.
Agreed. I think once the major known issues (update-grub2, gpt, etc) are
sorted out, we could send a call for testing, and take the decision after
observing the results.
--
Robert Millan
My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended
for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Steve Langasek wrote: If the intent really is to drop grub1, I agree that grub2 should be renamed to 'grub' to ensure a smooth upgrade path. Couldn't BTW grub become an empty package depending either on grub2 or on grub1? (this seems more clean, and would allow for different dependencies on different architectures.) -- Luca Brivio -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 06:09:55PM -0300, Otavio Salvador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ok. This means that the actual upgrade from grub1 to grub2 should be totally safe for all users by default, because grub-install is not automatically run, yes? Yes. It won't change the system until user runs grub-install by himself. It would deserve a note while upgrading to ask the user to do it as soon as possible and if we opt to keep grub available we can also explain how to revert to upgrade if need. After upgrade, but before grub-install, how would a grub1 install find its stage2 and menu.lst in /boot/grub which would either not be there or be there at an incompatible version ? Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On 4/25/07, Otavio Salvador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: Looking at these: http://grub.enbug.org/CurrentStatus#head-3aeedb23576d9559e29d0da487861a82761d0f87 http://grub.enbug.org/TodoList#head-45b6c08cea58b68a06b6b8e4b29058818c8472d5 grub2 doesn't seem to support my current fs (reiser3). What other such regressions are there? Is there a wiki page for this transition yet? -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 09:59:51AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - easier to maintain; - better codebase; - multi-arch support; - active upstream; Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. Thoughts? I wonder if we will also move from yaboot-installer to grub2-installer on powerpc, and if you have given any thought to that migration path ? Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder if we will also move from yaboot-installer to grub2-installer on powerpc, and if you have given any thought to that migration path ? Our main goal is to switch i386 and amd64 first. We intend to use GRUB2 as much as possible also to reduce the duplication work maintaining too many boot-loaders but it's not our main goal right now to move it as default to other arches. Depending of how well it goes, we can try to revisit this and maybe move other arches too. Obviously it'll have the final word from the porting team who has the need knownledge to decide if it's worth or not to move for it. The migration from yaboot shouldn't be hard to handle since its configuration format can, probably, be converted as well. The migration path, as for i386 too, could be the installation of the package with a debconf note asking for the installation of the boot-loader using grub-installer and the removal of previous boot-loader. I wouldn't like to get my boot-loader replaced without any notice. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Op 25-04-2007 om 10:18 schreef Otavio Salvador: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder if we will also move from yaboot-installer to grub2-installer on powerpc, and if you have given any thought to that migration path ? Our main goal is to switch i386 and amd64 first. My advice to make that switch (and switch back) more easy, is to implement a bootselector. Menu-item-number would the current confirm install grub, which is a 'boolean'. bootselector is 'multi select'. Cheers Geert Stappers submitter of http://bugs.debian.org/413263 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 09:59:51AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello, We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - easier to maintain; - better codebase; - multi-arch support; - active upstream; Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). I would like to offer grub-legacy as an option (even in d-i) for the release. It's good to have a fallback in case it is needed. But of course, it's been in maintainance mode only for a while now, and adding new features to it is out of the question at this point (the same applies to upstream). The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Also note that the user interface (grub-install + update-grub) is backwards compatible. The change could well remain unnoticed :-) After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. Let's see if we can try to prevent this from happening again. I think the key points are: - Fight wishlist requests. grub2 is feature-rich, and upstream welcomes new development. New features should be added and dealt with through upstream (unless they're debian-specific, of course). - Merge bugfixes in upstream, fast. Jason and I have commit access and good relation which them. I think that can help. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). I would like to offer grub-legacy as an option (even in d-i) for the release. It's good to have a fallback in case it is needed. But of course, it's been in maintainance mode only for a while now, and adding new features to it is out of the question at this point (the same applies to upstream). If we keep it on expert mode only I don't have any problem with it. I think that, depending of raised issues we can opt by dropping it or not. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geert Stappers) writes: Op 25-04-2007 om 10:18 schreef Otavio Salvador: Sven Luther [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I wonder if we will also move from yaboot-installer to grub2-installer on powerpc, and if you have given any thought to that migration path ? Our main goal is to switch i386 and amd64 first. My advice to make that switch (and switch back) more easy, is to implement a bootselector. Menu-item-number would the current confirm install grub, which is a 'boolean'. bootselector is 'multi select'. You mean for the both grub and grub2? Well, we want to reduce the grub usage and then this shouldn't looks to be the best way of doing it. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:52:50AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Robert Millan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). I would like to offer grub-legacy as an option (even in d-i) for the release. It's good to have a fallback in case it is needed. But of course, it's been in maintainance mode only for a while now, and adding new features to it is out of the question at this point (the same applies to upstream). If we keep it on expert mode only I don't have any problem with it. I think that, depending of raised issues we can opt by dropping it or not. We should probably do the transition in installed testing/sid systems and decide upon the results what do we do for d-i. popcon can provide useful info if we do this. -- Robert Millan My spam trap is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Note: this address is only intended for spam harvesters. Writing to it will get you added to my black list. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wednesday 25 April 2007 14:59, Otavio Salvador wrote: We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - better codebase; Is grub2 fundamentally different from grub, or is it basically based on the current grub but just developed further? - multi-arch support; Do you really mean multi-arch or just supports more architectures? Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). How well has the new grub been tested so far? Are there any use cases that grub2 is not known to support that grub does support? Have all the regular installs already been checked (e.g. root on raid1)? Has e.g. support for Xen been checked? Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? Has been checked that grub2 scripts don't write to stdout? Does grub2 solve any of the issues we currently have with grub? - xfs support - lvm support - wrong detection of correct boot device in BIOS It would be really nice to have a wiki page comparable to the one for the initrd generator change [1] that gives an overview of such issues. The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Does the conversion program support all possible features in a current grub menu.lst or are there areas where this is uncertain? How widely has the conversion script been tested? After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If you really mean to deprecate grub in favor of grub2, then you should probably rename grub2 to grub at some point before the release of Lenny. Cheers, FJP [1] http://wiki.debian.org/InitrdReplacementOptions pgpxNk5vrs6OV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wednesday 25 April 2007 14:59, Otavio Salvador wrote: We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - better codebase; Is grub2 fundamentally different from grub, or is it basically based on the current grub but just developed further? - multi-arch support; A complete rewrite code. Do you really mean multi-arch or just supports more architectures? Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). How well has the new grub been tested so far? It has some regular users and they hadn't complained about issue since some time. We're hopping to get a new snapshot in next week or so. Are there any use cases that grub2 is not known to support that grub does support? Not that I'm aware of but probably has. Have all the regular installs already been checked (e.g. root on raid1)? I hadn't check raid1 myself. Has e.g. support for Xen been checked? It works. Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? It should support. Is difficult to test it without hardware access. Has been checked that grub2 scripts don't write to stdout? Yes. Does grub2 solve any of the issues we currently have with grub? - xfs support Looks like. - lvm support I hadn't check - wrong detection of correct boot device in BIOS I hadn't check It would be really nice to have a wiki page comparable to the one for the initrd generator change [1] that gives an overview of such issues. Yes, that's on my todo list. The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Does the conversion program support all possible features in a current grub menu.lst or are there areas where this is uncertain? The current sid version basically uses the same code and should work. The new code is being written and should cope with all them. How widely has the conversion script been tested? Not finished yet but shouldn't be too complex and difficult to test. After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If you really mean to deprecate grub in favor of grub2, then you should probably rename grub2 to grub at some point before the release of Lenny. Yes. It's still being dicussed if we'll or not do it. It's mostly depend of how stable grub2 proves to be. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 09:59:51AM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: We, the GRUB team, want to swtich to GRUB2 due many reasons, basicaly: - easier to maintain; - better codebase; - multi-arch support; support for multiple architectures :) Our current plan is to finish the update-grub2 merging on upstream side (being handled by Robert) and then upload a new package to Debian. This package after moving to lenny ought be set as default boot-loader in grub-installer (while we still offer grub as an option during the test cicle). Frans already asked most of the questions that I had. A few others: Is anybody else using grub2 as a default bootloader today? Has testing of grub2 explicitly included testing on older x86 systems, given that we've found that i486 was effectively not tested at all thoroughly before the etch release (the distro in general, not grub in particular)? The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Hrm. What was wrong with the existing format? :/ Those are the kinds of upstream changes that are most aggravating for administrators (or at least for this administrator here :). After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If the intent really is to drop grub1, I agree that grub2 should be renamed to 'grub' to ensure a smooth upgrade path. The migration path, as for i386 too, could be the installation of the package with a debconf note asking for the installation of the boot-loader using grub-installer and the removal of previous boot-loader. I wouldn't like to get my boot-loader replaced without any notice. At least in the case of x86, I'm not sure how that's any different from what happens with any other upgrade of the bootloader. I guess the grub1 boot sector is incompatible with grub2, and this is what has to be rewritten on upgrade? On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:02:18PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? It should support. Is difficult to test it without hardware access. Well, those are the kinds of things that I think should be checked before asking the installer team to commit to using it by default. After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If you really mean to deprecate grub in favor of grub2, then you should probably rename grub2 to grub at some point before the release of Lenny. Yes. It's still being dicussed if we'll or not do it. It's mostly depend of how stable grub2 proves to be. Again, if grub2 isn't stable enough to be called 'grub', then I really think it's not stable enough to be made the default in d-i either. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Frans already asked most of the questions that I had. A few others: Is anybody else using grub2 as a default bootloader today? Not yet. Has testing of grub2 explicitly included testing on older x86 systems, given that we've found that i486 was effectively not tested at all thoroughly before the etch release (the distro in general, not grub in particular)? No but since we'll be offering grub as alternative for a while it could be sorted out. The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Hrm. What was wrong with the existing format? :/ Those are the kinds of upstream changes that are most aggravating for administrators (or at least for this administrator here :). hehe it has been much improved and added some neat features. :-) After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If the intent really is to drop grub1, I agree that grub2 should be renamed to 'grub' to ensure a smooth upgrade path. I also agree but I don't think we should decide it until we have it as default for a while. After that we can decide if we drop or not grub1. The migration path, as for i386 too, could be the installation of the package with a debconf note asking for the installation of the boot-loader using grub-installer and the removal of previous boot-loader. I wouldn't like to get my boot-loader replaced without any notice. At least in the case of x86, I'm not sure how that's any different from what happens with any other upgrade of the bootloader. I guess the grub1 boot sector is incompatible with grub2, and this is what has to be rewritten on upgrade? Yes, it's incompatible but until the user run grub-install he would still being using the previous release. On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 02:02:18PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Has grub2 been checked for obvious past issues we've had in grub (like /dev/cciss/c0d0 support)? It should support. Is difficult to test it without hardware access. Well, those are the kinds of things that I think should be checked before asking the installer team to commit to using it by default. Well yes and no. I and Robert will upload the new packages with update-grub2 and the last fixes in few days (maybe next week?) and after we have it all sorted out we could change it while keeping grub1 as an option. After doing it, we intend to drop grub from archive since it's a bunch of patches difficult to maintain and hard to follow. If you really mean to deprecate grub in favor of grub2, then you should probably rename grub2 to grub at some point before the release of Lenny. Yes. It's still being dicussed if we'll or not do it. It's mostly depend of how stable grub2 proves to be. Again, if grub2 isn't stable enough to be called 'grub', then I really think it's not stable enough to be made the default in d-i either. We hope it's but we won't be sure until we do that change since we wouldn't get the needed group of testers. :( -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:14:09PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: The upgrade from grub to grub2 will be transparent since menu.list can be automaticaly converted to the new format and this will be in place when we start the default boot-loader change. Hrm. What was wrong with the existing format? :/ Those are the kinds of upstream changes that are most aggravating for administrators (or at least for this administrator here :). hehe it has been much improved and added some neat features. :-) Which tells me nothing. There was nothing missing from menu.lst for me that I felt needed to be improved with a new format... The migration path, as for i386 too, could be the installation of the package with a debconf note asking for the installation of the boot-loader using grub-installer and the removal of previous boot-loader. I wouldn't like to get my boot-loader replaced without any notice. At least in the case of x86, I'm not sure how that's any different from what happens with any other upgrade of the bootloader. I guess the grub1 boot sector is incompatible with grub2, and this is what has to be rewritten on upgrade? Yes, it's incompatible but until the user run grub-install he would still being using the previous release. Ok. This means that the actual upgrade from grub1 to grub2 should be totally safe for all users by default, because grub-install is not automatically run, yes? -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:14:09PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Hrm. What was wrong with the existing format? :/ Those are the kinds of upstream changes that are most aggravating for administrators (or at least for this administrator here :). hehe it has been much improved and added some neat features. :-) Which tells me nothing. There was nothing missing from menu.lst for me that I felt needed to be improved with a new format... The new grub.cfg behaves more like a shell, it can scripting capabilities and allow more freedom to the user do what he wish to. For reference: http://grub.enbug.org/grub.cfg At least in the case of x86, I'm not sure how that's any different from what happens with any other upgrade of the bootloader. I guess the grub1 boot sector is incompatible with grub2, and this is what has to be rewritten on upgrade? Yes, it's incompatible but until the user run grub-install he would still being using the previous release. Ok. This means that the actual upgrade from grub1 to grub2 should be totally safe for all users by default, because grub-install is not automatically run, yes? Yes. It won't change the system until user runs grub-install by himself. It would deserve a note while upgrading to ask the user to do it as soon as possible and if we opt to keep grub available we can also explain how to revert to upgrade if need. -- O T A V I OS A L V A D O R - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br - Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Proposed release goal: Switch to GRUB2
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:14:09PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote: Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Frans already asked most of the questions that I had. A few others: Is anybody else using grub2 as a default bootloader today? Not yet. Just an entry point, which may or may not be important here. Sun has decided to make grub2 the default for opensolaris, including their powerpc opensolaris port. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
