Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 15:14 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 12:02 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Mar 21, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > >> > >> > We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running > >> > grub2-mkconfig and > >> > clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. > >> > >> *shrug* I think grubby makes for an increasingly cluttered grub.cfg. > >> With the latest behavior I'm seeing with 2.00~beta2's grub2-mkconfig, > >> it cleans up after itself nicely. The grub.cfg pretty clearly > >> indicates it can be clobbered, by design. > > > > yeah, I have to admit I get the feeling we're kind of swimming against > > the tide, now. I'm not sure it would be so terrible to just decide to go > > with the upstream design, run grub2-mkconfig any time grub2.cfg needs > > updating, and tell people to do customization in the /etc/grub.d stuff > > as upstream intends. > > > > The whole point of going with grub2 was to get closer to upstream and > > reduce our maintenance burden, right? grubby feels like a substantial > > chunk of maintenance burden too. > > grubby wraps multiple bootloader configurations. grub, grub2, yaboot, and > possibly one other. While it might be reasonable for it to just run > grub2-mkconfig if it detects grub2 installed, it's still needed for the > other bootloaders that are used in Fedora. Otherwise the kernel spec > would need to handle all of this directly instead of calling grubby. That > sounds like a nightmare. Yeah, pjones reminded me of that on IRC, I'd kind of forgotten. Although, strictly, what we call in the kennel spec is new-kernel-pkg, right? And that's what looks at all the bootloader config files and decides what to do. So I guess it would be new-kernel-pkg which we would change to call grub2-mkconfig instead of grubby when it finds a grub2 config. If we wanted to do that. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 09:01 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: > > Has somebody filed a bz about this issue? I haven't seen one referenced in > > the > > thread. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=805310 > > I haven't yet managed to reproduce, though. I'm running grub2 '1.99-19', > I installed a kernel package, got no errors, rebooted, and the new > kernel was booted. > > So it seems this doesn't hit every config, we'll have to figure out what > the busted configs have in common. > > Can those experiencing issues with the new grub please take a look at > the bug, check their symptoms match the reporter's symptoms, and provide > as much info as possible? Thanks. OK, so we figured this one out (it's triggered if you have the newer grub2.cfg layout produced by grub2-mkconfig in 1.99-19) and there is a grubby update which more or less fixes it: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/grubby-8.11-1.fc17 can people please test and karma that? We'll want to pull it into Beta. Thanks! -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > yeah, I have to admit I get the feeling we're kind of swimming against > the tide, now. I'm not sure it would be so terrible to just decide to go > with the upstream design, run grub2-mkconfig any time grub2.cfg needs > updating, and tell people to do customization in the /etc/grub.d stuff > as upstream intends. > > The whole point of going with grub2 was to get closer to upstream and > reduce our maintenance burden, right? grubby feels like a substantial > chunk of maintenance burden too. I just don't see the benefit of people's main grub menus being persistently populated with overly verbose entries, in a simple single Fedora system. And the argument to use grubby because it doesn't clobber grub.cfg in multiple-OS situations doesn't follow logically either, because the other distros can certainly clobber that same grub.cfg, again by design, with full warning of this in multiple locations not least of which is the grub.cfg itself. Which BTW, this insertion by grubby makes the header info of the grub.cfg in between misleading and false. That header says the file was generated by grub-mkconfig, which after it's been molested by grubby is not completely true. The present mkconfig behavior in f17bTC2 is really quite clean in terms of menu structure - visually it's still way too NYC black attire... but that's another matter. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 12:02 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: >> On Mar 21, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Peter Jones wrote: >> >> > We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running grub2-mkconfig >> > and >> > clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. >> >> *shrug* I think grubby makes for an increasingly cluttered grub.cfg. >> With the latest behavior I'm seeing with 2.00~beta2's grub2-mkconfig, >> it cleans up after itself nicely. The grub.cfg pretty clearly >> indicates it can be clobbered, by design. > > yeah, I have to admit I get the feeling we're kind of swimming against > the tide, now. I'm not sure it would be so terrible to just decide to go > with the upstream design, run grub2-mkconfig any time grub2.cfg needs > updating, and tell people to do customization in the /etc/grub.d stuff > as upstream intends. > > The whole point of going with grub2 was to get closer to upstream and > reduce our maintenance burden, right? grubby feels like a substantial > chunk of maintenance burden too. grubby wraps multiple bootloader configurations. grub, grub2, yaboot, and possibly one other. While it might be reasonable for it to just run grub2-mkconfig if it detects grub2 installed, it's still needed for the other bootloaders that are used in Fedora. Otherwise the kernel spec would need to handle all of this directly instead of calling grubby. That sounds like a nightmare. josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 12:02 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mar 21, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > > > We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running grub2-mkconfig > > and > > clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. > > *shrug* I think grubby makes for an increasingly cluttered grub.cfg. > With the latest behavior I'm seeing with 2.00~beta2's grub2-mkconfig, > it cleans up after itself nicely. The grub.cfg pretty clearly > indicates it can be clobbered, by design. yeah, I have to admit I get the feeling we're kind of swimming against the tide, now. I'm not sure it would be so terrible to just decide to go with the upstream design, run grub2-mkconfig any time grub2.cfg needs updating, and tell people to do customization in the /etc/grub.d stuff as upstream intends. The whole point of going with grub2 was to get closer to upstream and reduce our maintenance burden, right? grubby feels like a substantial chunk of maintenance burden too. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 21, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Peter Jones wrote: > We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running grub2-mkconfig and > clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. *shrug* I think grubby makes for an increasingly cluttered grub.cfg. With the latest behavior I'm seeing with 2.00~beta2's grub2-mkconfig, it cleans up after itself nicely. The grub.cfg pretty clearly indicates it can be clobbered, by design. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 11:17 -0400, Peter Jones wrote: > On 03/21/2012 02:27 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 00:12 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > >> > >>> It seems reasonable to consider this a grubby bug, yes? > >> > >> > >> Considering grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg produces the exact > >> correct result, guess I'm not understanding the purpose of grubby. Are > >> we in transition? > > > > grubby is less 'drastic' that grub2-mkconfig. it takes the existing > > config and appends a new entry to it. grub2-mkconfig blows away the > > config and starts over again each time. > > > > i don't recall whether we ever made a specific decision to keep using > > grubby over grub2-mkconfig or whether it's just inertia, though. pjones > > might. > > We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running grub2-mkconfig and > clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. > > Has somebody filed a bz about this issue? I haven't seen one referenced in > the > thread. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=805310 I haven't yet managed to reproduce, though. I'm running grub2 '1.99-19', I installed a kernel package, got no errors, rebooted, and the new kernel was booted. So it seems this doesn't hit every config, we'll have to figure out what the busted configs have in common. Can those experiencing issues with the new grub please take a look at the bug, check their symptoms match the reporter's symptoms, and provide as much info as possible? Thanks. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 11:20 +0100, Michal Schmidt wrote: > Dne 21.3.2012 03:56, Adam Williamson napsal: > > Properly, it ought to be versioned grub2-2.00-0.1.beta2.fc17. (Or possibly > > grub2-2.00-0.1.~beta2.fc17, I really dunno what that tilde is for). > > The tilde is a debianism to mark a pre-release. > dpkg understands version 42~foo as lower than 42. Ahh. Thanks. So we wouldn't use it. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On 03/21/2012 02:27 AM, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 00:12 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: It seems reasonable to consider this a grubby bug, yes? Considering grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg produces the exact correct result, guess I'm not understanding the purpose of grubby. Are we in transition? grubby is less 'drastic' that grub2-mkconfig. it takes the existing config and appends a new entry to it. grub2-mkconfig blows away the config and starts over again each time. i don't recall whether we ever made a specific decision to keep using grubby over grub2-mkconfig or whether it's just inertia, though. pjones might. We definitely want to keep using grubby instead of running grub2-mkconfig and clobbering whatever's in your config file every time. Has somebody filed a bz about this issue? I haven't seen one referenced in the thread. -- Peter -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 20:30 -0700, John Reiser wrote: > On 03/20/2012 06:24 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > After a yum update a few minutes ago, GRUB's kinda messed up. Anyone else? > > Yes, it happened to me, too, after booting an up-to-the-minute anaconda > install DVD > for _update_ (not fresh install). I built the DVD to test the changes that > are > claimed to fix the problems of last weekend. This is on "bare metal" real > hardware > (including physical DVD) with no virtualization of any kind. > > I recovered by re-running a complete fresh install, because I had only a > short time invested in the originally-installed system. > > > > Eventually it boots, but uname -r indicates 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3 not 3.3.0-1. > > Yes. > > > So is this a problem with grubby? Or is this ... wait. Why does the GRUB2 > > menu says it's GRUB version 2.00~beta2, and yet yum says what's installed > > is 1.99-19 from repo koji-override-1? grubby is 8.10-1. > > Yes, I see the same versions. Saw same errors (yesterday I think) when I had F17 running and did an update. Has this been fixed anytime soon or whatever? -- Mike Chambers Madisonville, KY "Best little town on Earth!" -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
> The yum update didn't update grub, but it did update the kernel. This is > the first time you have done a kernel update via yum with the new grub2. > > grubby updates the grub.cfg file. seems reproducible. My grub config is pretty empty, too. During update, I get something an error: grubby fatal error; unable to find a suitable template -- Matthias Runge -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
Dne 21.3.2012 03:56, Adam Williamson napsal: Properly, it ought to be versioned grub2-2.00-0.1.beta2.fc17. (Or possibly grub2-2.00-0.1.~beta2.fc17, I really dunno what that tilde is for). The tilde is a debianism to mark a pre-release. dpkg understands version 42~foo as lower than 42. Michal -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 00:12 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > > > It seems reasonable to consider this a grubby bug, yes? > > > Considering grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg produces the exact > correct result, guess I'm not understanding the purpose of grubby. Are > we in transition? grubby is less 'drastic' that grub2-mkconfig. it takes the existing config and appends a new entry to it. grub2-mkconfig blows away the config and starts over again each time. i don't recall whether we ever made a specific decision to keep using grubby over grub2-mkconfig or whether it's just inertia, though. pjones might. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 21, 2012, at 12:08 AM, Chris Murphy wrote: > It seems reasonable to consider this a grubby bug, yes? Considering grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg produces the exact correct result, guess I'm not understanding the purpose of grubby. Are we in transition? Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 20, 2012, at 11:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>
> The yum update didn't update grub, but it did update the kernel. This is
> the first time you have done a kernel update via yum with the new grub2.
>
> grubby updates the grub.cfg file.
It seems reasonable to consider this a grubby bug, yes?
I think I found the problem in its grub.cfg (the one I named grub.cfg.bak). In
the two menuentry lines after ### BEGIN /etc/grub.d/10_linux; those menuentry
lines do not end with {. So everything after that is misinterpreted. Hence the
syntax errors and incorrect command.
The first menuentry that does end in { happens to be an entry for the old
kernel, a line that doesn't appear to have been modified by grubby or was
modified correctly.
Chris
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 23:43 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > On Mar 20, 2012, at 8:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote: > > I'm guessing it's the new grub2. I think I've seen another report of > > problems installing new kernels after the grub2 update, but I don't see > > any bug filed. Can someone file a bug on this, please? > > When I boot from Fedora-17-Beta-TC2-x86_64-Live-XFCE.iso and rpm -qa for > grub2 I get: > grub2-1.99-19.fc17.x86_64 > > When I boot from the yum updated version of this on hdd, I also get: > grub2-1.99-19.fc17.x86_64 > > It doesn't seem the yum update included an update to grub2 proper. I'm > not sure this is a grub2 bug. Is grubby still being used after kernel > updates? Or is anaconda calling grub2-mkconfig? Whatever modified > grub.cfg is what caused the problem. The yum update didn't update grub, but it did update the kernel. This is the first time you have done a kernel update via yum with the new grub2. grubby updates the grub.cfg file. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 20, 2012, at 11:43 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Only other thing I can think of is that there was something wonky that got > stuffed into grub.env /boot/grub2/grubenv has a modification time of 24 hours ago. So I don't think that's it. Maybe there's something important stuffed into the grubenv that the bad grub.cfg isn't using that it should, and the new cfg does use it. Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Mar 20, 2012, at 8:56 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> I'm guessing it's the new grub2. I think I've seen another report of
> problems installing new kernels after the grub2 update, but I don't see
> any bug filed. Can someone file a bug on this, please?
When I boot from Fedora-17-Beta-TC2-x86_64-Live-XFCE.iso and rpm -qa for grub2
I get:
grub2-1.99-19.fc17.x86_64
When I boot from the yum updated version of this on hdd, I also get:
grub2-1.99-19.fc17.x86_64
It doesn't seem the yum update included an update to grub2 proper. I'm not sure
this is a grub2 bug. Is grubby still being used after kernel updates? Or is
anaconda calling grub2-mkconfig? Whatever modified grub.cfg is what caused the
problem.
Bad grub.cfg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/grub.cfg.bak
Good grub.cfg (after manually running grub2-mkconfig)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/grub.cfg
I'm not seeing a big difference that would cause so many problems, but this is
an indicator to me that possibly grub2-mkconfig didn't create the grub.cfg
Bad grub.cfg:
set default="0"
Good grub.cfg created by grub2-mkconfig (manually by me):
set default="${saved_entry}"
Only other thing I can think of is that there was something wonky that got
stuffed into grub.env, which was cleared in the course of me running
grub2-mkconfig.
Chris Murphy
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On 03/20/2012 06:24 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > After a yum update a few minutes ago, GRUB's kinda messed up. Anyone else? Yes, it happened to me, too, after booting an up-to-the-minute anaconda install DVD for _update_ (not fresh install). I built the DVD to test the changes that are claimed to fix the problems of last weekend. This is on "bare metal" real hardware (including physical DVD) with no virtualization of any kind. I recovered by re-running a complete fresh install, because I had only a short time invested in the originally-installed system. > Eventually it boots, but uname -r indicates 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3 not 3.3.0-1. Yes. > So is this a problem with grubby? Or is this ... wait. Why does the GRUB2 > menu says it's GRUB version 2.00~beta2, and yet yum says what's installed is > 1.99-19 from repo koji-override-1? grubby is 8.10-1. Yes, I see the same versions. -- -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 19:24 -0600, Chris Murphy wrote: > After a yum update a few minutes ago, GRUB's kinda messed up. Anyone > else? > > Right off the bat I get these two (2nd is a continuation of the 1st): > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/first.png > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/second.png > > > Which apparently fails, because I then get this: > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/third.png > > Which, is not right, it's missing the primary/default "Fedora Linux" > option which should boot the newly updated and current kernel. If I > choose this Advanced option, or let it time out, I get this: > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/fourth.png > > > > Eventually it boots, but uname -r indicates 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3 not > 3.3.0-1. > > So is this a problem with grubby? I'm guessing it's the new grub2. I think I've seen another report of problems installing new kernels after the grub2 update, but I don't see any bug filed. Can someone file a bug on this, please? > Or is this ... wait. Why does the GRUB2 menu says it's GRUB version > 2.00~beta2, and yet yum says what's installed is 1.99-19 from repo > koji-override-1? pjones wasn't aware of the Fedora naming conventions for pre-release packages, so he just called 2.00~beta2 '1.99-19'. Properly, it ought to be versioned grub2-2.00-0.1.beta2.fc17. (Or possibly grub2-2.00-0.1.~beta2.fc17, I really dunno what that tilde is for). We will likely fix this up in a future build. The code is indeed 2.00~beta2, so '1.99-19' is a substantial jump from 1.99-18. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
OK so I figured I'd give grub2-mkconfig a shot: [root@f17v chris]# grub2-mkconfig -o /boot/grub2/grub.cfg Generating grub.cfg ... Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.3.0-1.fc17.x86_64 Found initrd image: /boot/initramfs-3.3.0-1.fc17.x86_64.img Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3.fc17.x86_64 Found initrd image: /boot/initramfs-3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3.fc17.x86_64.img Warning: Please don't use old title `Fedora Linux, with Linux 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3.fc17.x86_64' for GRUB_DEFAULT, use `Advanced options for Fedora Linux>Fedora Linux, with Linux 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3.fc17.x86_64' (for versions before 2.00) or `gnulinux-advanced-a82f4975-9e17-4a85-b167-575e1f2300bd>gnulinux-3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3.fc17.x86_64-advanced-a82f4975-9e17-4a85-b167-575e1f2300bd' (for 2.00 or later) done I'm not sure what the warning is about. And I don't know what caused it in the first place. But this does fix the problem, apparently. Main menu: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/main.png Advanced menu: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/advanced.png -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
F17 latest yum update hoses grub.cfg, grubby?
After a yum update a few minutes ago, GRUB's kinda messed up. Anyone else? Right off the bat I get these two (2nd is a continuation of the 1st): http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/first.png http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/second.png Which apparently fails, because I then get this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/third.png Which, is not right, it's missing the primary/default "Fedora Linux" option which should boot the newly updated and current kernel. If I choose this Advanced option, or let it time out, I get this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3253801/fourth.png Eventually it boots, but uname -r indicates 3.3.0-0.rc7.git0.3 not 3.3.0-1. So is this a problem with grubby? Or is this ... wait. Why does the GRUB2 menu says it's GRUB version 2.00~beta2, and yet yum says what's installed is 1.99-19 from repo koji-override-1? grubby is 8.10-1. Yeah I'm confused Chris Murphy -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
