From: LK <linuxrocksrulers@googlemail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] grub vs grub 2
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:40:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FEAA3B3-0A32-4347-9441-C0E3FE3E1F38@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F3AA6C7.4050501@trausch.us>
On 120214, at 19:24, mike@trausch.us wrote:
> On 02/14/2012 01:08 PM, LK wrote:
>> BTW: So is grub0 still supported by gentoo / maintained by themselves?
>> Does that matter(it is boot, no network stuff) ?
> GRUB Legacy (that is, GRUB versions 0.xx) is still the default in
> Gentoo. In order to use GRUB 2 (that is, GRUB version 1.99 in Portage)
> you'll have to unmask sys-boot/grub-1.99-r2.
The thing is, IMO grub0 is better / simplier.
> GRUB 2 is significantly more convenient and powerful and does not
> require the nearly 80 patches that the legacy version does in order to
> work properly on the system. It can also manage its own configuration
> file using its new grub-mkconfig (grub2-mkconfig in Gentoo) program,
> which supports the use of scripts/programs to generate grub.cfg entries
> for booting the kernel and other operating systems.
As you read above, I prefer grub0.* because it has config files, not
commands which will automize it. For ubuntu I can understand that,
but configuring boot is too simple to require automisation. When
now automatic script fails, is there a way to do it by hand? Ubuntu
disallows editing it by hand. Now I am confused by the 80 patches
for legacy grub =( afaik.
PS: If you know how to get rid of any background image, could you
say how?
THX + TIA.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-14 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-14 17:36 [gentoo-user] grub vs grub 2 james
2012-02-14 17:53 ` Florian Philipp
2012-02-14 18:08 ` LK
2012-02-14 18:24 ` mike
2012-02-14 18:40 ` LK [this message]
2012-02-14 18:46 ` Alecks Gates
2012-02-14 18:52 ` mike
2012-02-14 19:04 ` Michael Mol
2012-02-14 20:35 ` mike
2012-02-14 20:45 ` Michael Mol
2012-02-14 23:47 ` Paul Hartman
2012-02-14 23:53 ` mike
2012-02-14 19:29 ` Andrea Conti
2012-02-14 19:53 ` [gentoo-user] grub vs grub2 LK
2012-02-14 19:59 ` Michael Cook
2012-02-14 20:44 ` mike
2012-02-14 20:58 ` LK
2012-02-14 21:19 ` Michael Mol
2012-02-14 20:30 ` Alex Schuster
2012-02-14 20:46 ` mike
2012-02-14 20:42 ` [gentoo-user] grub vs grub 2 mike
2012-02-14 20:57 ` LK
2012-02-14 21:44 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-14 23:19 ` mike
2012-02-15 12:19 ` Tanstaafl
2012-02-15 12:28 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-15 12:33 ` Michael Mol
2012-02-15 14:37 ` mike
2012-02-15 14:47 ` Tanstaafl
2012-02-15 15:02 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-14 21:46 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-15 15:57 ` [gentoo-user] " James
2012-02-15 16:11 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-15 16:28 ` Claudio Roberto França Pereira
2012-02-15 17:17 ` Paul Hartman
2012-02-15 17:33 ` Doug Hunley
2012-02-15 17:40 ` Neil Bothwick
2012-02-15 8:10 ` [gentoo-user] " ny6p01
2012-02-14 20:57 ` [gentoo-user] " James
2012-02-14 18:07 ` [gentoo-user] " Stefano Crocco
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FEAA3B3-0A32-4347-9441-C0E3FE3E1F38@gmail.com \
--to=linuxrocksrulers@googlemail.com \
--cc=gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox